[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: more binutils?

On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 06:20:24PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 05:38:20PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > 
> > Nope - we should perhaps verify it's a real regression first. Do you have
> > a quick test case available? Does anyone have the previous known good
> > version of binutils around?
> Which is a good version? My apt-cache/proxy have these versions:
> binutils_2.17-2+b2_m68k.deb
> binutils-dev_2.17-2+b2_m68k.deb
> binutils_2.17-3_m68k.deb
> binutils-dev_2.17-3_m68k.deb
> binutils_2.17cvs20070426-3_m68k.deb
> binutils_2.17cvs20070426-6_m68k.deb
> binutils_2.17cvs20070426-8_m68k.deb

I have 2.17-3 and 2.17cvs20070426-8. Can you put the others where I can
grab them?



Stephen R. Marenka     If life's not fun, you're not doing it right!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: