>1. If I only require fairly basic functionality from the Clibs (Eg. malloc,
>file handling, forking, maths functions and few other things) then is it
>possible (easy?) to rip stuff out of glibc to reduce its size?
Possible, but not easy. H.J Lu has been looking into this; I think there
might be some stuff on sourceforge. If you only want to run a few binaries,
consider static linking.
>2. Are there alternatives to glibc which compile as dynamic libs for the arm
>linux kernel which could solve my size problem. For example is it possible
>to compile newlib as a dynamic lib for arm-linux (I've tried and haven't had
>much success), and if so does it have any size benefits? What about
>uC-libc? (foobar)-libc? All suggestions appreciated.
You can't use newlib at the moment, but it shouldn't be that hard to copy the
i386 Linux support and get something that works. It will be static only
though; I suspect making a dynamic library would be quite hard.
p.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
Please visit the above address for information on this list.
