On 18-06-2015 11:26, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jun 2015, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > >> >> >> On 18-06-2015 05:44, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >>>> On Jun 17, 2015, at 3:15 AM, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pi...@linaro.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, 4 Jun 2015, Jim Wilson wrote: >>>> >>>>> The normal toolchain process is that patches get added to our releases >>>>> only if they are already upstream. Our releases are FSF releases plus >>>>> patches backported from mainline, with no local changes except when >>>>> absolutely unavoidable. >>>> >>>> It is commit 451133cefa upstream. >>>> >>>> Please consider merging for the next toolchain release. I don't expect >>>> major conflicts if any. >>> >>> Hi Adhemerval, >>> >>> FAOD, are you planning to merge this feature into linaro's 2.25 or 2.24 >>> branch? >>> >>> My [very light] preference is to merge it to 2.25, but not 2.24. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >> >> Do we need it to 2.24? Is this patch preventing current kernel builds for >> older >> binutils releases? > > Current kernels are fine without it. My work on kernel tinification > requires it though. Depending on when this work will be ready for wider > consumption, it would be nice if our binutils already carried the > necessary support. > > I don't know what the 2.24 vs 2.25 release timeline is, but if 2.25 is > released, say, before next Connect then it should be good enough. > >
Binutils 2.24 was officially released 2013/12 and Binutils 2.25 at 2014/12. Current distros uses versions from 2.23 (RHEL7/CentOS7), 2.24 (Ubuntu 14), or 2.25 (Debian Jessie) and I think next Linaro toolchain will use 2.25. I would prefer to focus on 2.25, since 2.24 is reaching two years old, however since this modification seems to be very constrained, I do not see much work being required to backport to 2.24. > Nicolas > _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
