This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Should binutils source tree include zlib source?

From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
To: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
Cc: binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:48:19 -0800
Subject: Re: Should binutils source tree include zlib source?
References: <6dc9ffc80901091020p52fedbe6ycb2d0356ba856987@mail.gmail.com> <2ca21dcc0901091141r56b9f304sc4fef9ffc326135b@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Dave Korn
<dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com> wrote:
> H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Binutils uses zlib. Should zlib source be included in binutils tree?
>>
>
>  Can't see any terribly good reason to.  It's widely available as a standard
> system library, we aren't in any need of forking it, and it would add to the
> binutils project's maintenance/support burden, wouldn't it?
>

Zlib source is included in gcc source tree. It is useful for
cross binutils.


-- 
H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should binutils source tree include zlib source?
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: Should binutils source tree include zlib source?
  - From: DJ Delorie

References:
- Should binutils source tree include zlib source?
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: Should binutils source tree include zlib source?
  - From: Dave Korn

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]