On 01/28/2011 05:48 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 01/28/2011 09:17 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Andreas Schwab<sch...@redhat.com> writes:
Ralf Corsepius<ralf.corsep...@rtems.org> writes:
- Remove newlib from the source tree
--without-newlib should probably be enough.
But that seems strange to me as some of the configure scripts test for
--with-newlib and adjust their configury accordingly. This would put
them in a position where they actually are using newlib but are told
that they are not. It might well be that they will do feature tests and
come up with the right result, but I am frankly skeptical that this will
happen with libstdc++-v3 at least, as it does do specific target tests.
libstdc++-v3/configure.ac around line 230:
# First, test for "known" system libraries. We may be using newlib
even
# on a hosted environment.
if test "x${with_newlib}" = "xyes"; then
os_include_dir="os/newlib"
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_HYPOT)
....
Yes, I just also noticed this place.
Several details are with this if do not seem right:
a) the hardcoded AC_DEFINE(HAVE_ICONV)
RTEMS doesn't have iconv
b) when using an external newlib binary, the libstdc++'s standard math
checks should "just work", because modern RTEMS newlib is supposed to
have most of complex and c99's math.
There are other non-with/without-newlib related issues in
libstdc++/acinclude.m4 which seem suspicious wrt. RTEMS to me, but I
haven't investigated in depth, yet.
Ralf
