Re: ARM undefined symbols. Again.
From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Fri Feb 25 2005 - 15:32:08 EST
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Russell King wrote:
> We can't say "you must use the current CVS binutils to build the
> kernel" because that's not a sane toolchain base to build products
Sure. But it's probably enough that just a couple of core developers would
have a CVS version to make sure that when it occasionally happens, it gets
noticed quickly enough.
In other words, I don't think you can say "get the CVS version" to most
users, but I do not see for example you you or some of the people around
you don't have at least one setup set up with that fixed version.
This has been going on for at least a year, probably longer. I could
understand it if it was a "we found this old bug, and haven't had time to
get around it", but what I don't understand is when there's been a tools
bug that's been known about for a long time, and apparently nobody has
ever even bothered to try the fixed versions.
> And yes, the toolchain peoples point of view is "fix the kernel".
For a known bug where just having _one_ active developer using a fixed
tool would mean that this doesn't happen?
That makes no sense. Or, more likely, it means that the toolchain people
are incompetent bastards who don't care about bugs and have no pride at
all in what they do.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/