Date:	Tue, 2 May 2000 14:56:20 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Embedded programming
In-Reply-To:	<390E93A7.B685FF3B@mtu-net.ru>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000502144857.22132O-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, 2 May 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:

> > It can, but it's not trivial.
> 
> Why *not* trivial?

This is probably a matter of a definition of ``trivial''.

To me, ``trivial'' is something for which you don't need to hack the 
package and/or have an intimate knowledge of linker operation.  An 
example of a ``trivial'' job would be to use some compiler switch or 
environment variable, but otherwise use the tools in a normal manner.

> Just don't use LIBC and/or write replacement for functions
> you need.

How many people know how to write replacements for library functions?
Most of them won't refer to this as being ``trivial''; many won't even 
know where to begin.

> > If the CPU *is* an x86, you still will probably have to use a custom
> > linker script and write a small converter to convert the COFF output
> > to whatever your target uses.
> 
> That's not a problem too.

How many people even know what the linker script is, let alone how to 
write your own?  This is not ``trivial'', although certainly possible.
DJ certainly knows that, since he is the one who wrote the DJGPP linker 
scripts we all use.  If DJ says this is not trivial, you better believe 
him ;-).

> I have some simple scripts that do all the job.

Surely, you cannot be positive these scripts will do what the original 
poster needs?

- Raw text -