Re: gcc on an OS less system

["Viswanathan Sankararam" <vishu27 at cox dot net>]

Actually the system I am using has no set of service functions at all. In
fact there is no board at all. This is a system model that is in VHDL. It
has the xscale model and the entire system peripherals including a memory
model in VHDL/Verilog. I am able to execute xscale assembly on this with the
use of gnu as assembler. Now I would like to be able to directly use C++
programs on this software model. So there are absolutely no service
routines. I would like to resolve the symbols emitted by gcc when it creates
an object prior to linking with libc. It seems that the libc that exists in
newlib is for someother board architecture. I would like advice on how I can
approach this problem.

I really appreciate your response

Thanks
Vish
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Erik Christiansen" <erik@dd.nec.com.au>
To: "Viswanathan Sankararam" <vishu27@cox.net>
Cc: <crossgcc@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 9:59 PM
Subject: Re: gcc on an OS less system


> On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 06:09:37PM -0700, Viswanathan Sankararam wrote:
> >     The question is how will I override the system calls that come with
> > libc.a with my implementation of the syscalls. Do I just remove
syscalls.o
> > from the archive and add mine. Would that work?
>
>    Having on the one hand, gcc-generated code that makes posix system
> calls, and on the other, a raw target with some arbitrary set of service
> functions, it's a bit optimistic to expect the two to be aware of the
> existence of each other, let alone be able to interwork. What usually
> ends up happening is a set of wrapper functions which accept the
> caller's argument list, and invoke the most appropriate service function
> available, mapping the arguments.
>
>    If any degree of robustness is desired, then there arises the
> question of how well the found service functions satisfy all the
> possible expectations of the gcc-generated code. That's often when you
> start rewriting the service functions.
>
>    Good luck. :-)
>
> Erik
>
> ------
> Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ,
http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
> Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to
crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
>
>


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com