This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the newlib project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: How was newlib supposed to have been used?

On 18 January 2008 06:45, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 23:57 +0000, Luke A. Guest wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 13:43 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>> Neither, nor and all of it.
>>> newlib is a libc implementation.
>> Yeah, I'm aware of this :/
>>> I.e. it is a library providing a standardized API to resources
>>> underneath, which applications might want to use at run-time, and which
>>> toolchains (compiler/linker etc.) will want to know about.
>> And this too.
>>> What these resources actually are is secondary. They can be
>>> "bare-metal", a full fledged kernel or other libraries.
>>> Newlib can be and is being used in all of these situations.
>> Right, so as I'm aiming for bare hw, am I going in the right direction
>> to get *a minimal GNAT runtime* working for i386-elf (and mips[el]-elf)?
> I don't know how to answer this.
> GNAT, normally is a toolset implementing a programming language (Ada)
> built around/ontop of a libc.
> Leaving aside all other ugliness of GNAT, I am not sufficiently familiar
> with Ada to be able to judge how far you can get without at least having
> some OS-elements (processes, memory-management, io, etc.) available.

  I have no personal experience with GNAT[*], but a google "gnat newlib"
suggests that RTEMS, at least, does use or has used newlib to support GNAT on
target i386-rtemscoff-gnat-newlib among others.  You might be able to get
somewhere by adapting the instructions at


[*] - or RTEMS, for that matter.
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]