Hello Bill, On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 11:34:45 -0500, Bill Pringlemeir <bpringlem...@nbsps.com> wrote:
> Originally Daniel Gutson used '-mauto-it' and then it was converted to > '-mimplicit-it'. Ok, so I was right in my gut(son)[1] feeling that -mauto-it was a predecessor of -mimplicit-it -- and actually only in the first iteration(s) of the patch that would have introduced it. > I am not sure if '-mauto-it' exists in the wild. I have never heard of > that option before seeing this email thread. Also my assembler says, > > Assembler messages: > Error: unrecognized option -mauto-it > > I have built with the most recent binutils, gcc4.9.1 using crosstool-ng. > Maybe only some non-mainline tools picked up this '-mauto-it' patch. I > don't think it hurts to support '-mauto-it', but an assembler test > should be done to see if it accepts the option. I've gone through the binutils git tree, and -mauto-it is mentioned only in a patch that fixes the gas /docs/ which erroneously mentioned -mauto-it where it should have mentioned -mimplicit-it. Hence, I think we should not test for -mauto-it at all, and not mention it even. Stefan, can you resubmit without the -mauto-it part, and renaming AFLAGS_AUTOIT into AFLAGS_IMPLICIT_IT? > hth, > Bill Pringlemeir. Amicalement, -- Albert. [1] I am never ashamed of doing lame puns. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
