[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2 v6] Make libgcc inclusion from common Makefile overridable by platform config file

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

On Wednesday 15 July 2009 19:03:36 Scott Wood wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 15 July 2009 18:18:20 Scott Wood wrote:
> >> It seems pretty reasonable for U-Boot to provide functions like
> >> raise()/abort() that take the place of a hardware exception, and display
> >> an error message.
> >
> > i disagree here.  how much of the C library are you proposing we
> > implement ? if libgcc keeps calling more and more functions,
>
> Has it been?
>
> > you suggest we keep adding stubs for it ?  seems like a never ending
> > losing battle where we get screwed.
>
> I don't see any slippery slope here, just a handful of functions that
> any reasonable freestanding implementation is going to want (memcpy,
> etc) and some way of getting an error out (raise/abort).
>
> If it starts wanting libc functions that aren't reasonable, then of
> course we should complain (possibly with patches, for those willing to
> deal with the copyright assignment process).

i think calling raise/abort is already unreasonable for bare metal 
applications.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20090715/77ce2643/attachment.pgp