On Thursday 16 April 2009 11:14:29 Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 April 2009 10:28:57 pm Roman I Khimov wrote:
> > On Wednesday 15 April 2009 23:25:12 Khem Raj wrote:
> > > On (15/04/09 16:35), Roman I Khimov wrote:
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../binutils-x86_64_i386_biarch.patch              |   25
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++ recipes/binutils/binutils_2.18.bb               
> > > >   | 2 +-
> > > >  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > >  create mode 100644
> > > > recipes/binutils/binutils-2.18/binutils-x86_64_i386_biarch.patch
> > >
> > > Looks ok. Could you also make this on later versions of toolchains.
> > > I am not worried about the older ones.
> >
> > Works good with 2.19 and 2.19.1, but not 2.18.50.0.7.
>
> FWIW 2.18.50.0.7 is default binutils for some distros (angstrom)

True, didn't check initially its usage, so it's going to be something like 
attached.

Do I need to bump PR's for all binutils touched?