[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D7890CE.60800@suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:50:22 +0100
From: Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: x86: kill binutils 2.16.x?
On 3.3.2011 09:30, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>> kbuild people: is there a way to test for a specific assembler version
>> in Kbuild (and error out the build for it?)
>
> Could we add a testcase for one of the more egregious breakages and bail out then?
> That way we don't have to get the version information right - broken prereleases
> would be covered as well.
>
> For example this sequence:
>
> .irp idx,0,1,2
> .if 0 > \idx
> .endif
> .endr
>
> Will break on 2.16, right? It builds fine on 2.20.
This seems to work for me with the binutils version from sles10 (even
with a vanilla build of binutils):
$ as -v <<EOF; echo $?
> .irp idx,0,1,2
> .if 0 > \idx
> .endif
> .endr
> EOF
GNU assembler version 2.16.91.0.5 (i586-suse-linux) using BFD version
2.16.91.0.5 20051219
0
$
So either the bug is fixed in that version already or you picked a wrong
example (or I did not understand what should fail here). But don't get
me wrong, I'm all for checking for actual bugs instead of innocent
version strings.
Michal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists