This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: 68hc11/12/s12x/xgate patch
- From: James Murray <jsm at jsm-net dot demon dot co dot uk>
- To: binutils at sourceware dot org
- Cc: nick clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 21:25:57 +0100
- Subject: Re: 68hc11/12/s12x/xgate patch
- References: <1298845471.12108.12.camel@jsm2> <1299515895.3262.1.camel@jsm2> <4D7F247D.email@example.com> <1300201861.20997.3.camel@jsm2> <1324419607.8652.84.camel@jsm2> <CABZhLO-Ye-G1nYW1eqpdjnYG1W4zaKq+TvgzFBebJk4ash5mtg@mail.gmail.com> <1324423375.8652.94.camel@jsm2> <4EF36049.firstname.lastname@example.org> <CABZhLO_RKXkcKRGH_b-f_iVYppcgBQ3XBf9STWjZeTCwrQJhzQ@mail.gmail.com> <1324575421.2430.42.camel@jsm2> <1325800936.20629.53.camel@jsm2> <4F0C4DFE.email@example.com> <1330300482.15684.10.camel@jsm2> <1331564819.2407.61.camel@jsm2> <1333370230.16991.34.camel@jsm2> <1335197942.13205.295.camel@jsm2> <1337003987.27195.60.camel@jsm2> <4FB2525C.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 13:55 +0100, nick clifton wrote:
> I have now gone over the patch. There were a few formatting issues, but
> these were minor. The main thing (to me) is that it works and it does
> not break any other ports. So I have checked it in.
Thanks for taking the time, I appreciate that there was a fair bit to
> This does mean that we now have two different ways of supporting the
> XGATE processor. I feel that the best way to resolve this is to see how
> these two ports fare in the long term. If one of them turns out to be
> too buggy or unmaintained then it will be dropped.
As noted before, this code (earlier version of it) is in active use and
has been used to generate firmware that is powering thousands of