This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Binutils backwards incompatibilities?
- From: Jeff Baker <jbaker at qnx dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:02:45 -0500
- Subject: Re: Binutils backwards incompatibilities?
- Organization: QNX Software Systems Ltd.
- References: <41AC533F.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: jbaker at qnx dot com
I am aware of a couple of incompatibilities with SH4 support. For one a
subset of the relocations were renumbered; the second involves the
treatment of relocation addends. We ship our kernel in such a manner
that it needs to be relocated as it's being added to a boot image. The
relocation addend change means that you can't relocate a kernel built
with an older toolchain with the newer toolchain or vice versa.
Is this the kind of stuff I'd find in the NEWS files?
Nick Clifton wrote:
Is there any way to easily get a list of any potential backwards
incompatibilities between binutils versions? We're finally looking to
move forward to a newer version (from 2.12.1 to 2.15, at least) but
management needs to know about any gotchas before they'll sign off.
Have a look at the NEWS files in the ld/ binutils/ and gas/
In general there should not be any backwards incompatibilities from a
user's perspective, with the possible exception of toolchains that have
been rendered obsolete and are no longer supported.
From an application point view, (ie an application that uses the BFD
library) there have been quite a few changes in the API, especially
between 2.14 and 2.15. These are not normally documented, but will
become obvious as soon as the application is rebuilt.