Re: Debian binutils dependency policy
- To: Camm Maguire <camm@enhanced.com>
- Cc: Lionel Elie Mamane <lionel@mamane.lu>, 328483@bugs.debian.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, gcl-devel@gnu.org, binutils@packages.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Debian binutils dependency policy
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:50:51 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20050920155051.GA21931@nevyn.them.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Camm Maguire <camm@enhanced.com>, Lionel Elie Mamane <lionel@mamane.lu>, 328483@bugs.debian.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, gcl-devel@gnu.org, binutils@packages.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 54mzm7kapd.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com>
- References: <20050915154442.GA302@harif.cs.kun.nl> <[🔎] 543bnzx24g.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> <[🔎] 20050920141337.GA19124@nevyn.them.org> <[🔎] 54mzm7kapd.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com>
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:42:06AM -0400, Camm Maguire wrote:
> OK, but this is a pity. I still don't understand why this need be the
> case.
Because the interface between BFD and binutils is subject to change and
does on a regular basis, and there are not enough users to bother doing
anything more complicated.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
Reply to: