From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Tue Feb 5 08:30:30 2008 Message-ID: <47A86491.6080404@utbm.fr> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:28:49 +0100 From: Olivier Landemarre MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mint Subject: Re: [MiNT] strip References: <47A732CA.9000803@freesbee.fr> <47A85ECA.1040307@freesbee.fr> In-Reply-To: <47A85ECA.1040307@freesbee.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: olivier.landemarre@utbm.fr Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.sparemint.org id m15DUTKX011968 Vincent Rivière a écrit : > Frank Naumann wrote: >> From the things I heard on the mailinglist, are the binutils 2.18 >> stable and work together with gcc 2.95? If yes we can easily update >> just the binutils. Then there is no conflict at all :-) > > Yes, binutils 2.18 seems stable, there is no known problem with them. > GCC 2.95 works fine with it. > > I would be very happy if binutils 2.18 is adopted as the official MiNT > version. > > However, I made 2 important things in the 2.18 patch. > They need some discussion before it can be widely used. > > 1) Alignment. > GCC 2.95 (and current GCC 4.2.3) have a default alignment of 2 bytes. > However, binutils 2.13 have a default alignment of 4 bytes. I > configured binutils 2.18 for a default alignement of 2, in order to be > consistent with GCC. It works perfectly, no byte is wasted. However, > that default alignment of 2 might not be the best choice for our > platform. That's why I opened a new thread about alignment some time > ago. Now I will have more time to continue that discussion. If binutils 2.13 alignment is 4, we should stay at 4, the problem should appear when compil dynamic lib or software using dynamic lib . I suppose aligment of PureC is too at 4 So compatibility mix of older binutils PureC with new binutils will be broken. For example if I compil screen.ldg with new gcc and use it with my softwares probably it will crash. Olivier > >