crt0 formalization

[Joel Sherrill]

Jeff Johnston wrote:
> <resent due to sources.redhat.com rejecting my original reply message 
> due to the fact it included the original patch and thereby exceeded a 
> size constraint>
>
> Is it fair to say no one has objections to this patch?  I will check 
> it in later today unless I hear otherwise.
>
I don't remember seeing this patch and I don't see any email from 
jschopp or a message with
"formalization" in the subject in the newlib mailing list archives for 
the past few months .
It may be fine but I don't think it has been seen on the newlib list.

Which platform is the crt0 for?

--joel
> -- Jeff J.
>
> jschopp wrote:
>> In our recent SDK 2.0 and in patches being submitting for FSF gcc 
>> there are some changes to crt0.  The attached patch has been 
>> extensively tested as part of our SDK.  Everything works as 
>> expected.  The only minor regression is that it pulls in atexit(), 
>> which in turn pulls in malloc().  This works fine but takes up space, 
>> which is precious on this platform.  Previous discussions on this 
>> list have sent some patches with resolve the problem of pulling in 
>> malloc.
>>
>> In my opinion the attached patch should be committed.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------