I noticed that a newer version of binutils is in the source code tree
(2.91). Is there anything that needs to be set during the make world
to make 2.91 the default binutils?
- Donn
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 03:18:38PM -0400, Donn Miller wrote:
I noticed that a newer version of binutils is in the source code tree
(2.91). Is there anything that needs to be set during the make world
to make 2.91 the default binutils?
Uh... that would be 2.9.1 which is the version that is
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:36:12AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
One possible thing to try would be to download the latest binutils
from the GNU ftp site or mirrors, compile, and install them in
/usr/local. Then, set /usr/local/bin as the first entry in your PATH
environment variable to
Pascal Hofstee wrote:
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:36:12AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
One possible thing to try would be to download the latest binutils
from the GNU ftp site or mirrors, compile, and install them in
/usr/local. Then, set /usr/local/bin as the first entry in your PATH
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 09:29:07AM +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
Hi,
I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
2.9.1
I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
2.9.1 assembler.
That's odd, I have M13 working just great here under -current
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 05:46:12AM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
2.9.1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Donn Miller
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2000 3:36 AM
To: Pascal Hofstee
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: newer binutils for CURRENT ?
Pascal Hofstee wrote:
They all suggest updating my
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:36:12AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
One possible thing to try would be to download the latest binutils
from the GNU ftp site or mirrors,
If you did that you would find the the latest GNU release is 2.9.1.
Guess what -- Binutils is getting little maintaince. They are
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 09:30:19AM -0500, Stephane Potvin wrote:
I've been using the latest binutils from cygnus for the last month without
...
But as I take it (only my 0.02$) it won't happen until they release an
official version and it doesn't seems to be anywhere soon.
It doesn't seem it
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:00:07PM +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
in this case it's not M13 but the latest CVS tree ... But i'll see if
recompiling the beast for a few days on end eventually will get it back in
shape again. if not ... i'll probably come back and complain ;-)
Don't complain to
Hi,
I would have to agree with David. The release version of binutils is
horrendously out of date. The most recent (non-release) version can be found
at ftp://ftp.varesearch.com/pub/support/hjl/binutils/binutils-2.9.5.0.24.tar.gz.
I've made a transition to the most recent set of GNU
Daniel Robbins wrote:
I've made a transition to the most recent set of GNU development tools for
my own (Linux) distro, and all I can say is that it may take a bit of fiddling to
find the "best" binutils that will work with gcc 2.95.2. But, it's definitely
worth the work, since gcc's new
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
Why don't we do it? Let's find out from the maintainer of binutils
which version he recommends, and then integrate it into the next
version of -current. We can find the bugs and fix them on our own.
Personally, I'd like to find
Hiya,
OK, I'll email him and ask him to post suggestions to this list, and
forward the message to me. However, I am a FreeBSD newbie, recently
arriving from the Linux camp, so any specific problems/questions that
need to be asked should be asked by whoever is having the problem,
( i.e. I am
On Sat, 12 Feb 2000, Daniel Robbins wrote:
URL above, and it seemed to work ok. You *can expect* problems and
challenges integrating 2.95.2 into FreeBSD -- it's like a whole new
compiler. And it *will* cause new compile errors that were not
flagged before. That's just the nature of the
16 matches
Mail list logo
