From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Finn Thain Subject: Re: toolchain, was Re: bogl: don't know screen type 1 Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 15:07:02 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: References: <8259f0250908302028n9b0cb56td402539007736fce@mail.gmail.com> <20090831120617.GA1114@marenka.net> <8259f0250908310558l3ddd5fam7d15946a7c1e8572@mail.gmail.com> <8259f0250908311511h77270544vb2dc3dd383f1add8@mail.gmail.com> <8259f0250908311516r49e54c7fi44ead0f040cade30@mail.gmail.com> <20090901151747.GB27514@marenka.net> <20090905010830.GA14809@marenka.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from www.telegraphics.com.au ([204.15.192.19]:33295 "EHLO mail.telegraphics.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751312AbZIFFHD (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Sep 2009 01:07:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090905010830.GA14809@marenka.net> Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen R Marenka Cc: debian-68k@lists.debian.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 01:43:14AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote: > > > > The patches posted to the binutils mailing list are incomplete. The > > binutils patch at > > http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/tls/ > > is broken according to Kolla: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2009/07/msg00001.html > > > > But in that post (June 28) Maxim recommends using mainline binutils, and > > since then we have HJL binutils-2.19.51.0.14 released, "...based on > > binutils 2009 0722 in CVS on sourceware.org..." So I guess I should start > > there. > > > > I understand that the current GCC (4.4) lacks the necessary patches, and > > 4.5 is still uncooked (and that's a scary prospect). Can someone confirm > > that this is the necessary patch for 4.4: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg01024.html > > Presumably not this one? > > http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/tls/gcc_patch2 > > (and gcc_patch1 is clearly broken... perhaps it was actually the same > > thing before being mangled... Stephen, I don't think this "/tls" directory > > is helping any.) > > Shall I remove it then? I'd remove it. The gcc commit in question is this one, http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=147654 which appears to be the very one in the mailing list archive at the URL above (you can download a raw version at that URL). A quick visual shows that tls/gcc_patch2 doesn't match the commit (the revision numbers in the diff confirm that it is older). Finn