From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9548 invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2009 15:47:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 9537 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Sep 2009 15:47:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:46:59 +0000 Received: from spaceape14.eur.corp.google.com (spaceape14.eur.corp.google.com [172.28.16.148]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n8FFkvHo015377 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:46:57 -0700 Received: from vws41 (vws41.prod.google.com [10.241.21.169]) by spaceape14.eur.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n8FFksKQ010356 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:46:55 -0700 Received: by vws41 with SMTP id 41so2580880vws.4 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:46:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.59.4 with SMTP id h4mr12647647yba.299.1253029614085; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:46:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <77f815bd0909150638s49b0ce27g722a005384f495a6@mail.gmail.com> References: <77f815bd0909150619y7996f1a7lfdfc2e79bbd88b22@mail.gmail.com> <77f815bd0909150638s49b0ce27g722a005384f495a6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:47:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Which version of binutils matches the BFD and Opcode in GDB6.8? From: Doug Evans To: xingxing pan Cc: gdb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00204.txt.bz2 [repeating for the list's sake] Like I said, they come from the same source tree so there is only one bfd/opcode from a source tree point of view. And collectively we (gdb people + binutils people) maintain that source tree (though there are many who work on both). But since gdb and binutils are on different release schedules, you can't necessarily match the copies of bfd/opcodes in each. If binutils/gdb are released at similar times, the differences will be small but not necessarily identical. For completeness' sake, Procedurally, bfd/opcodes patches go to the binutils mailing list, they "own" bfd/opcodes. On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 6:38 AM, xingxing pan wrote: > You mean there are two groups of people maintain the bfd/opcode > respectively? Why not use one bfd/opcode? What's the difference? > > 2009/9/15 Doug Evans : >> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 6:19 AM, xingxing pan wrote: >>> Are the BFD and Opcode in GDB6.8 =A0from the binutils or developed >>> separately from binutils? >> >> Depends on what you mean by "separate". :-) >> >> They do come from the same source tree, and so are not separate in >> that sense, *but* they are released at different times, and so one >> can't, technically, match bfd/opcodes from a binutils release with the >> ones in a gdb release. >> >