Miro Kropacek wrote:
mshort targets in gcc libs are required to build EmuTOS, and maybe
FreeMiNT.
They may be required for other exotic software (games...) not using
the MiNTLib and compiled with -mshort.
I've just noticed that -- gcc libs are ok then but why libm and
libstdc++ ? Since we don't provide libc for -mshort for years, there's
no real reason to have c++ and math libs, is it?
When I started working with GCC, I wanted to get a cross-compiler for generating optimal code for a standard ST with 68000 and plain TOS. Of course this goal implied the use of -mshort. I planned to replace the MiNTLib by some other lightweight TOS-only libc, with support of -mshort. So I built the other libraries with -mshort, when it was supported.
This was a personal goal, and I will probably never continue in this way. When I compile some software in "lightweight mode", I use -nostartfiles and -nodefaultlibs, and I provide my own lightweight CRT and some support functions.
The mshort version of libstdc++.a is probably a nonsense, since no one is going to use iostream and co for realistic programs optimized for ST. The libm.a could be useful sometimes, but I'm not sure.
So I agree with you, we should not build the mshort libraries for the standard MiNT distribution (except the ones necessary to build EmuTOS and FreeMiNT).
-- Vincent Rivière