> From: Andrew Pinski [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
>
> I think your patch is broken since the object file (_eprintf.o) should
> not be pulled in unless it is used and it is part of an archive and
> for archives cause the linker to only bring in object files which have
> things referenced to them.
I
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Thomas Preud'homme
> wrote:
>>> From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
>>>
>>> I don't think anything uses __eprintf any more. The function has been
>>> left behind for very very very old systems. Ac
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>> From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
>>
>> I don't think anything uses __eprintf any more. The function has been
>> left behind for very very very old systems. Actually we could
>> probably remove it now. Probably the old s
> From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
>
> I don't think anything uses __eprintf any more. The function has been
> left behind for very very very old systems. Actually we could
> probably remove it now. Probably the old support for not building
> __eprintf when --with-newlib was spec
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
wrote:
>
> When playing with a toolchain built with --with-newlib switch, I recently
> noticed that libgcc.a includes __eprintf among its objects. However,
> gcc/doc/install.texi states that --with-newlib switches "causes
> @code{__eprintf} to
