binutils 2.20 gone missing?
Sebastian Unger
sebunger44@gmail.com
Thu Jan 17 19:29:00 GMT 2013
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Thu Jan 17 19:29:00 GMT 2013
- Previous message (by thread): binutils 2.20 gone missing?
- Next message (by thread): binutils 2.20 gone missing?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
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
- Previous message (by thread): binutils 2.20 gone missing?
- Next message (by thread): binutils 2.20 gone missing?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list