binutils 2.20 gone missing?

[Sebastian Unger]

Thanks guys.

I have that file, (we kept the source) and confirmed both MD5 and SHA1
match. I'd still recommend putting it back in the archive if there
wasn't a good reason to remove it in the first place so as to avoid
confusing others. If there was a good reason, then a README.2.20
explaining the same would be good.

Cheers,
Seb

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 17 January 2013 13:57:38 Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> On 1/17/2013 12:43 PM, Sebastian Unger wrote:
>> > Hi Joel,
>> >
>> > that was 2.20.1a. The two are now identical in the archive, so 2.20.1a
>> > replaced 2.20.1 completely. But there's no trace of 2.20.
>>
>> Ahh...
>>
>> I checked an RTEMS tools testing machine and I have the
>> binutils-2.20.tar.bz2 file on it.
>>
>> $ md5sum binutils-2.20.tar.bz2
>> ee2d3e996e9a2d669808713360fa96f8  binutils-2.20.tar.bz2
>
> FWIW, i have the same and here's some more signed hashes:
> http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-devel/binutils/Manifest?revision=1.594
> -mike