> Dear Peter,
> In message <1252426573.6005.253.ca...@localhost.localdomain> you wrote:
> >
> > Going over the emails and my own testing, it looks the following
> > versions worked:
> ...
> Thanks for the detailed analysis.
> I remember that gcc-3.4.x has always been marked as "suspicious" in
> our tests, so for example we avoided basing an ELDK release on it.
> > Does anyone out there by chance have a failure case for gcc > 4.0.0,
> > because I can't seem to reproduce the issues others had in the past.
> Do you have an up-to-date patch that can be used for such testing?
> > My vote would be to find out which version of gcc contains the
> > relocation bug and spit out an error if gcc < than that version is used.
> Agreed.
> > We could also try and get fancy and dynamically turn on/off relocation
> > support at compile time based on gcc's version if other's wanted to
> > maintain support for older compilers.  These changes would only be for
> > ppc at this point btw.
> I think there would be not  much  lost  if  we  dropped  support  for
> versions before gcc-4.x

Please don't. I still use gcc 3.4.6 and it has no issues. I suggest
dropping support for gcc < 3.4.6 instead.


U-Boot mailing list

Reply via email to