[PATCH] libgloss/arm: Remove abort.

[Richard Earnshaw]

On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 23:03, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > On 6/1/06, Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> That is no problem, however, I just realized that I missed the fact that
> >> the libc/sys/arm directory needs to be changed as well because the flag
> >> will affect those users that don't disable newlib supplying syscalls.
> >> Since it is a bit more than a minor touch-up, any chance you could post
> >>   another patch with the additional changes to libc/sys/arm?
> > 
> > 
> > I don't fully understand why the duplication of libgloss/arm and
> > libc/sys/arm still exists. Keeping the two in sync is a royal pain.
> > Can we finally remove libc/sys/arm and be done with it? Adding
> > libgloss to the specs file would hide it from the user. Alternatively,
> > libgloss could be inserted into libc.a at the same time libc.a is
> > collected from all the component lib.a.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Shaun
> 
> We have talked about this before.  Gcc has to change over to use 
> libgloss by default.  Adding libgloss into the specs file would do it in 
> conjunction with making non-newlib-supplied-syscalls the default from 
> then on.  Adding libgloss back into libc.a is not going to happen.
> 

If I change gcc, won't it break the ability to use old versions of
newlib?  Also, won't it mean that people who don't want to use newlib as
their C library will have to provide a stub libgloss.a?

I need to understand more about this change if you want gcc to be
changed in this regard.

R.