Jamie Risk <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > But the presence of the `crti.asm` source file > (`gcc-4.5.0/gcc/config/arm/crti.asm`) is misleading me. Why is > it there? Is it for bare metal targets (sans glibc & Linux)? Right: it's only for the arm-elf target. > And it may not be fair to ask here, but why do cross compiling > hints/hacks for the ARM often cite making changes to > `gcc-4.5.0/gcc/config/arm/t-linux` so that `crti.asm` file in the same > directory *does* get built and linked? I don't know. I would not expect the simple crti.asm shipped with gcc to suffice for glibc, but perhaps it does. > I guess I'm seeking an answer to the paradox: which comes first, > glibc or gcc? I'm assuming that gcc does, but in a static form > that allows it to compile glibc, then use that to do a 'proper' gcc > build. Yes, precisely. Ian
