Newlib Linux Port
Wed Nov 30 19:38:00 GMT 2005
2005/11/30, Matt Kern <email@example.com>:
> Thanks for your reply about the newlib linux port. I've taken a mo to
> read back through your messages, and it looks as though we are
> running along the same lines. I have to say that we suspected that
> the linux port might not be as easy as the libgloss port, but we are
> still keen to press ahead here. Can I ask where you are up to in terms
> of your port at present? Are all your changes so far submitted as
> patches? I don't want to duplicate work that you have already done.
The majority of my work is posted. I'm still trying to figure out the
best way to clean up the header files. A number of useful declarations
are armoured in #if defined(__CYGWIN__) || defined(__rtems__), and I
don't want to add to the mess by adding || defined(__linux__). I'd
like to see these replaced by something like #ifdef __SUSV3__, #ifdef
__XOPEN__, #ifdef __BSD__, et cetera. With this method, each target
can specify which functions they want declared based on which
standards they implement.
All my unposted work is of the above header file clean up variety. I
got impatient though and just started removing all the #ifdef armour,
so my current patches are not really suitable for posting. I'll
revisit this some time in the short future.
More information about the Newlib