On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:08:48PM +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 01:03:57PM +0200, Manuel Lauss wrote: > > > > I consider that an experimental commit. It's meant to solve the problems > > > we're having on a few very large compilation units with the limited length > > > of branches. But if the cure turns out to be worse than the illness I'm > > > ready to pull it again. > > > > If it fixes bugs for people, then by all means leave it in. I was just > > curious because my self-written bootloader complained about it. > > I wonder why your bootloader cares about sections. Normally a bootloader > only ever should think about segments and the number of segments the > sections are getting mapped to should be unchanged by my patch. It doesn't -- I just thought that if the number ever gets bigger than what used to be the norm in alchemy-land then a) flash is erased, or b) something broke. > > Thanks for the explanation. > > Immer doch :-) Vielen Dank! Manuel Lauss
