------- Comment #13 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-17 17:15 ------- I reluctantly agree with Ian's comment in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-01/msg00332.html that: "I think it would be troubling if a gcc release required a very new binutils release on a popular platform like x86_64." I actually think we should be unsympathetic to this kind of mixing of components. GCC is the only major compiler that does not consider the compiler, assembler, and linker to be a "single unit". We've made the problem harder for ourselves than it needs to be, for the dubious benefit that users can download a new GCC release without having to get a new assembler and linker. However, even though I think our policy is counterproductive, it is in fact our policy. We shouldn't change the policy by accident; we should change it through conscious decision. Until then, we should indeed to as Ian suggests and: "modify the configure test for gcc_cv_as_cfi_directive to avoid the problem when using an older binutils" -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P3 |P1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40332
