This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Binutil compatibulity
- From: Sava Zxivanovich <sava dot zxivanovich at crsltd dot com>
- To: 'Corinna Vinschen' <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 16:03:16 -0000
- Subject: RE: Binutil compatibulity
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: 24 January 2002 15:45
> To: Sava Zxivanovich
> Cc: 'firstname.lastname@example.org'
> Subject: Re: Binutil compatibulity
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 03:34:56PM -0000, Sava Zxivanovich wrote:
> > Hi.
> > I am working with PowerPC 401 D2 - in deed PLX IOP480.
> > I have installed GCC chain that uses binutil 2.9.1, gcc 2.95.2 for
> > powerpc-elf.
> > Due to fact that as in that version do not support one
> operand - tlbwe,
> > I have to upgrade to one I hope does support - 2.10.1. I
> would not like
> > to use 2.11, I had quit a bad time with it (and GCC 3.0.1).
> > My question is if binutil 2.10 does support operand tlwbe (PowerPC
> > Embedded Environment, PowerPC 401D2), would there be any
> problem if I
> > configure binutils as ppc-eabi (I suppose yes, I would like just to
> > check that) and would it be any problem with gcc 2.95.2 (I
> suppose not,
> > but you never know).
> > Why am I asking all this? Well, we are very near to a point where we
> > would go with commercial compiler. Actually, this is a last
> cry before
> > that.
> Wrong mailing list.
> You should try email@example.com
> Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails
> regarding Cygwin to
> Cygwin Developer
> Red Hat, Inc.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html