ports cross-compilers vs. native toolchain

[Tim Kientzle]

On Mar 3, 2012, at 5:29 PM, Stanislav Sedov wrote:

> 
> On Mar 3, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Tim Kientzle <tim at kientzle.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 2) Missing div/mod functions in ARM libgcc.
>> 
>> You can work around this by adding -lc to a couple
>> of places in the u-boot makefiles.  I'm also looking into
>> a fix for FreeBSD libgcc.  (Looks like these functions
>> were disabled deliberately?
> 
> Hmm, maybe they are disabled because libc supplies them?

Yes, this seems to be exactly the rationale.

If I copy the various div/mod object files from libc.a into
libgcc.a, then u-boot compiles out-of-the-box with
the FreeBSD xdev tools.  I'm rebuilding the xdev tools now
with the obvious one-line patch to libcompiler_rt to verify
further.

Is there any compelling reason they can't be in both places?

Tim

P.S.  It is just a tad confusing that libgcc.a and libgcc.so are
completely different libraries with different contents compiled
from different sources. ;-)