Re: Is newlib' primary intent still targeted for embedded systemuse?

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn at redhat dot com>]

Paul Schlie wrote:
> Just curious, as newlib seems to be increasingly growing in both size and
> complexity seemingly to satisfy either Cygwin's platform requirements
> and/or more comprehensively satisfy various standards often with seemingly
> little apparent corresponding embedded system need, and/or correspondingly
> becoming increasingly dependant on presumptions of data type sizes typical
> of larger 32-bit platforms and memory availability, as opposed to those
> Likely 32-bits or less in size (typical of most smaller embedded systems).
>
> Is this intentional, or just a misperception; as not clear what newlib's
> role is intended to be if likely to slowly approximate the comprehensive
> complexity that glibc already offers?

Newlib is evolving.  It was originally meant to provide a basic C library for 
embedded platforms but it is also being used to provide something functionally 
between that of the basic ANSI C library and glibc.  In many cases, extension is 
made without affecting embedded platforms (e.g. the linux code kept separate in 
libc/sys/linux, certain directories of functions like 64-bit I/O are optional, 
flags can be used to disable features like stdio floating-point).  The other 
thing to remember is that embedded platforms link statically and bring in what 
they use for the most part.  Sometimes newlib drags in unwanted bloat, but in 
such cases, I am totally in favor of adding optional configuration flags to aid 
the smaller platform.  For example, there was talk recently of adding the regex 
functions into vanilla newlib.  If an embedded application doesn't use regex, 
then it shouldn't be affected by the new functions.  If other parts of newlib 
start using the regex functionality beneath the covers, then we should make that 
usage optional.  Ideally, one should be able to configure newlib to one's needs.

Regarding the push to make newlib POSIX-compliant: I have no problem complying 
various functions closer to the POSIX and C99 standards as this can add 
beneficial functionality in many cases.  As well, the addition of some commonly 
used functions can make porting code to use newlib that much easier.  Do I 
ultimately see newlib being made fully POSIX-compliant?  No.  That doesn't make 
sense for embedded platforms and glibc is already there for native platforms.

-- Jeff J.