Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 10:36:02 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ARM issue with old binutils Message-ID: <12B50B3F-88E0-430D-AB67-FBC1BC4373B1@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1106250911230.15592@gerinyyl.fvgr> References: <0C35FE0F-3301-44C6-AC40-233F6C446EBC@gmail.com> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1106250911230.15592@gerinyyl.fvgr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 25, 2011, at 9:16 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Damjan Marion wrote:
>> I see 3 options to fix this:
>>=20
>> 1. Ask clang folks to patch llvm to use old mnemonics ("mov r0, r0, =
rrx" instead of "rrx r0,r0")
>> 2. Maintain same patch for freebsd only
>> 3. patch binutils to support this new mnemonics
>=20
> 4. Finally upgrade to a modern version of binutils.
>=20
> Yes, I know that is GPLv3. Been there, done that, and it is not a =
problem=20
> at all, just FUD. IBM, SAP, Oracle, and all the others are not =
concerned
> about GPLv3 in the toolchain, nor should we. Except for FUD.
Except there *ARE* FreeBSD users that have said that it is a real =
problem for them. It isn't FUD. The project has adopted the policy in =
reaction to large commercial FreeBSD users that have very restrictive =
company policies driven by their legal department's evaluation of GPLv3.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?12B50B3F-88E0-430D-AB67-FBC1BC4373B1>