PATCH: Standardize on i[3-9]86 in Binutils

[Kelley Cook]

> I am not at all convinced that it is OK to accept identification
> strings for processors that do not exist yet (and may never exist).
> Changing the configuration to support "i[3-7]86" would be OK, but I am
> not happy with "i[3-9]86".  If it is important to you that the tools
> support "i[3-9]86" then please explain why, otherwise if you could
> submit a revised patch using "i[3-7]86" then I would be much obliged.

How about this version?

Kelley Cook

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: b_i786v2.diff
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/attachments/20030516/c6be6c52/attachment.ksh>