This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: backward/forward compatibility of binutils


On 07 July 2006 15:44, Mikhail Teterin wrote:

> On Friday 07 July 2006 09:27, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> = Of course. I didn't mention that it would be a nice thing to have. I'm
> = actually opposed to it.
> 
> Why not? How hard is it to keep API compatibility (no need for ABI)?

  Fairly.  If it was trivial, it would be that way already!

>  Why do you insist on every tool bundling its own version?

  Well, how about "Because if you bork your system shared libs, and you badly
need a get-out-of-jail-free card, having statically linked executables in your
toolchain may well save your life." ?

  The toolchain binaries are so vital to the system that they should carry on
working no matter what else goes wrong.  For me, that's well worth the
overhead of a bit of disk space.  YMMV of course.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]