On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:45 AM, vb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wolfgang, thank you for your reply, let me try to explain myself a bit > clearer: > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >> If you invest time in solving such problems, than your time willbe >> much better iinvested if you try to help solving the remaining issues >> with Grant's code. >> >> What Grant suggests is the way to go. I do not think your approach has >> chances for mainline. >> > > I am sorry to hear this, especially since what I suggest would be > completely compiler agnostic and would allow to avoid some of the > limitations one must follow today while adding stuff to u-boot.
The problem is that the u-boot C runtime setup is insane and must be fixed. Fix the C runtime and the problem goes away. The approach being suggested here would have us *preserve* the insane C runtime and actually depend on the runtime to remain insane in order to work. Not a good approach. The C runtime problem is solvable, but I didn't have the time or resources to properly dig into it and I got frustrated before it was fully debugged. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
