Please send it to tech@
On 2024/01/10 13:18, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:32:00PM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > I can't say. Though I doubt there would much objection if it's clean and
> > > not a copy of
On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:32:00PM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > I can't say. Though I doubt there would much objection if it's clean and
> > not a copy of a GPLv3-licensed upstream commit.
>
> what about this?
>
> i am not sure
On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:32:00PM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > I can't say. Though I doubt there would much objection if it's clean and
> > not a copy of a GPLv3-licensed upstream commit.
>
> what about this?
>
> i am not sur
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:32:00PM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I can't say. Though I doubt there would much objection if it's clean and
> not a copy of a GPLv3-licensed upstream commit.
what about this?
i am not sure about the situation on arm64. it looks like newer gnu
assemblers don't like
On 2024-01-02, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> what is the reason to only include GPLv2 and not GPLv3?
The new license terms are not wanted for the base OS.
As with GCC, a newer GPLv3 version is available in ports.
> that "as" doesn't support modern instructions is starting to cause
> all sorts of nasty
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 11:51:48AM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:56:55PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
>
> >
> > "Lorenz (xha)" writes:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 08:47:07PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Lorenz (xha)" writes:
> > > >
> > > > > just out of cou
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 01:34:14PM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> as cannot be used correctly anymore (at least on amd64) because it is
> missing the newer instructions.
It's perfectly usable for assembling any handwritten asm code that doesn't
use the newer instructions. I use the 'as' in base on
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 11:51:48AM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> Dunno what haoppened to as(1) specifically. But as we do not use
> standalone as(1) for our own builds, it does not get a lot of
> attention (in additional to the potential licensing issues).
as cannot be used correctly anymore (at
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:56:55PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
>
> "Lorenz (xha)" writes:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 08:47:07PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
> > >
> > > "Lorenz (xha)" writes:
> > >
> > > > just out of couriosity, why is "as" in the base system if it > is
> > > > outdated and is updating
"Lorenz (xha)" writes:
On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 08:47:07PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
"Lorenz (xha)" writes:
> just out of couriosity, why is "as" in the base system if it
> is
> outdated and is updating it an option?
i presume it's due to subsequent versions being licensed under
later
versi
On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 08:47:07PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
>
> "Lorenz (xha)" writes:
>
> > just out of couriosity, why is "as" in the base system if it is
> > outdated and is updating it an option?
>
> i presume it's due to subsequent versions being licensed under later
> versions of the GPL, but
"Lorenz (xha)" writes:
just out of couriosity, why is "as" in the base system if it is
outdated and is updating it an option?
i presume it's due to subsequent versions being licensed under
later versions of the GPL, but i'd be happy to be corrected on
this point.
Alexis.
On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 10:04:07AM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 10:00:34AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 03:39:14PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 04:51:14AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> > >
> > > > hi misc@,
> > > >
On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 10:00:34AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 03:39:14PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 04:51:14AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> >
> > > hi misc@,
> > >
> > > like the subject says, `as` in the base system cannot do endbr64
> > >
On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 03:39:14PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 04:51:14AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
>
> > hi misc@,
> >
> > like the subject says, `as` in the base system cannot do endbr64
> > instructions. should it be updated?
> >
> > background: i am maintaining har
Ah, only disasm support was added to binutils.
On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 09:55:25AM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> That's curious.
>
> We never invoke as directly these days.
>
> It feels like an upstream llvm bug, and I say that because noone else has
> embraced BTI/IBT as much as we have, everyone else is still considering it
> a thing for sp
That's curious.
We never invoke as directly these days.
It feels like an upstream llvm bug, and I say that because noone else has
embraced BTI/IBT as much as we have, everyone else is still considering it
a thing for specific applications or the future.
Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> hi misc@,
>
> lik
On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 04:51:14AM +0100, Lorenz (xha) wrote:
> hi misc@,
>
> like the subject says, `as` in the base system cannot do endbr64
> instructions. should it be updated?
>
> background: i am maintaining hare for openbsd and we always have
> to install "gas" from the "binutils" package
hi misc@,
like the subject says, `as` in the base system cannot do endbr64
instructions. should it be updated?
background: i am maintaining hare for openbsd and we always have
to install "gas" from the "binutils" package because the normal one
is too old. i'd be nice if we don't depend on any pac
20 matches
Mail list logo
