Re: New binutils

[Nick Hudson <nick.hudson%gmx.co.uk@localhost>]

On Thursday 03 September 2009 15:47:32 Bernd Ernesti wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 01:17:10PM +0100, Nick Hudson wrote:
> > Anyone see a problem with the attached diff to change from MKBFD to
> > MKBINUTILS and support HAVE_BINUTILS for set lists? I've left a backwards
> > compatibility hook for anyone who might use MKBFD.
>
> What is the reason behind this change?

The reason is to be consistent with {MK,HAVE_}{GCC,GDB} and to allow, e.g.

./usr/lib/libbfd.so.10          base-sys-shlib          binutils=216
./usr/lib/libbfd.so.11          base-sys-shlib          binutils=219

in sets lists. This mean I can switch over arch/platforms to new binutils 
gradually.

Nick