This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Re: Which libgcc?
- To: Andrew Lunn <andrew dot lunn at ascom dot ch>
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] Re: Which libgcc?
- From: Jonathan Larmour <jlarmour at redhat dot co dot uk>
- Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 20:10:31 +0000
- CC: bartv at redhat dot com, kenneth_porter at kensingtonlabs dot com, ecos-discuss at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd.
- References: <200002041916.UAA03227@biferten.ma.tech.ascom.ch>
Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> > Fortunately you do not need to know about any of this because the
> > compiler will pick up the right version automatically - as long as you
> > do not confuse it.
>
> Maybe im confused :-)
>
> I configure and build the arm-elf compiler with multilibs
> disabled. There is an option you can give to it to do this. I've not
> had problems build eCos binaries. I belive Jifl said that the miltilib
> libraries not used for eCos.
Ooh, no, I would never have said that :-). You may be thinking of
libio/newlib/libstdc++ etc. which aren't used by eCos at all. And for libgcc
you can certainly remove some of the multilib permutations that you know you
won't need, e.g. for recent arm-elf toolchains you can configure with any of
--disable-fpu, --disable-26bit, --disable-underscore, --disable-biendian and
possibly others.
Or you can hack gcc/config/arm/t-arm-elf to set up the multilibs you really
want.
For most users, I would recommend just building all the libgcc multilibs -
they aren't big enough to be a problem.
Jifl
--
Red Hat, 35 Cambridge Place, Cambridge, UK. CB2 1NS Tel: +44 (1223) 728762
"Plan to be spontaneous tomorrow." || These opinions are all my own fault