Subject: [email@example.com: Bug in netbsd wastes space for all ELF platforms?]
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Aaron J. Grier <email@example.com>
Date: 09/19/2001 17:45:09
----- Forwarded message from "H . J . Lu" <firstname.lastname@example.org> -----
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 12:05:36 -0700
From: "H . J . Lu" <email@example.com>
To: Richard Henderson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Bug in netbsd wastes space for all ELF platforms?
In-Reply-To: <20010917162158.K30386@redhat.com>; from email@example.com on Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:21:58PM -0700
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:21:58PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:08:37PM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > Does that mean Linux also wastes 400 bytes? I'd like to get them back
> > for Linux.
> Yes, but do not uglify the linker scripts even more with
> such port-specific hacks. 400 bytes isn't worth that.
Does that impact all Linux platforms or just Linux/mips? If it is a
netbsd bug, why can't we ask them to fix their code? As the last
resort, they can always modify their private linker scripts if they
don't want to fix their code. They have been doing that for a long
time anyway. I don't think everyone who use the GNU binutils should
suffer just because netbsd is broken.
For those who didn't follow this thread, please see
----- End forwarded message -----
Aaron J. Grier | Frye Electronics, Tigard, OR | firstname.lastname@example.org
"In a few thousand years people will be scratching their heads
wondering how on earth the first computer was invented and
bootstrapped without a prior computer to do it with."
-- Chris Malcolm, on comp.arch