Re: The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
Subject: Re: The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips
From: Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
Date: 14 Sep 2001 12:40:01 -0700
Cc: binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <20010914123642.A18552@lucon.org>
References: <20010914123642.A18552@lucon.org>
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com


> It seems that those small differences between 2 assemblers make a big
> difference for the Linux/mips kernel. Does anyone know why?

Dunno, what's the change.

-eric

-- 
Look out behind you!

References:
- The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips
  - From: H . J . Lu

Prev by Date: The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips
Next by Date: Re: setup_frame() failure
Previous by thread: The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips
Next by thread: About KGDB debug questions...
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux MIPS Home] [LKML Archive] [Linux ARM Kernel] [Linux ARM] [Linux] [Git] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCSI] [Linux Hams]

Powered by Linux