Major CVS LFS bug - binutils-2.13.2.1

Greg Schafer gschafer at zip.com.au
Mon Jan 27 19:28:46 PST 2003


On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 09:25:13PM -0600, Jack Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:15:14 -0600, Greg Schafer wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 09:14:01PM -0600, Jack Brown wrote:
> >> 
> >> Shouldn't that be added back in regardless what else we do?
> > 
> > C'mon Jack. You normally pay more attention than that! :-)
> > 
> > http://archive.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2002/12/0629.html
> > 
> > Greg
>  
> Ooo right, forgot about the --with-ld=/lfs/static/... thing.  Thanks.
> 
> Regardless, my vote would be to stay with GNU binutils.

I still stand by what I said here:-

http://archive.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2003/01/0399.html

IMHO, the evidence is mounting against the FSF version. And Ian should
really gets his facts straight before sprouting off..

Personally, I've made the move to the HJ release and haven't looked back
(yet! :-)

Greg
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list