Ping/Repost (Updated 20120127): RFA: Add Epiphany newlib & libgloss port
Sat Jan 28 00:26:00 GMT 2012
Quoting Jeff Johnston <email@example.com>:
> Can you explain why you didn't move sbrk.c from libc/sys/epiphany into
> libgloss with the rest of the syscalls which is recommended?
I was focusing on I/O (I realized there were two isatty definitions and
it was non-obbvious which one was used).
sbrk is more tied to linker scripts. Still, I suppose it makes sense to
have it in libgloss, too. I'll have to check that that won't cause any
issues for the customer, though.
> than that, the changes look fine.
Does that mean the port submission is approved if I move sbrk to libgloss?
Or were you talking only about the incremental changes of the Epiphany port
More information about the Newlib