Remove any reference to libfloat. That has gone once and for all.
Rationale:
Most of the time, soft-float problems are caused by this sucker of gcc:
it has support for soft float for all of the targets I've tried so far,
but does not activate this code until you dwelve into half a dozen of
files to make it accept to build and link the support code...
So, yes: gcc has soft-float support. And again, yes: gcc is a sucker.
1 ML: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2005-09/msg00002.html
3 Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 21:07:15 +0900 (JST)
4 Message-Id: <20050905.210715.15267870.kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp>
5 To: libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com
6 Subject: SH: A typo in lowlevellock.S
7 From: Kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>
11 The appended patch fixes a typo in a low-level lock function. It
12 set the correct 3rd argument for the futex syscall in loop. Sorry
13 for missing such an embarrassing bug.
19 2005-09-05 Kaz Kojima <kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp>
21 * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sh/lowlevellock.S (__lll_mutex_lock_wait):
22 Fix typo in register name.
24 --- glibc.old/nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sh/lowlevellock.S 2004-10-26 04:06:44.000000000 +0900
25 +++ glibc/nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sh/lowlevellock.S 2005-09-05 19:18:25.000000000 +0900
27 -/* Copyright (C) 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
28 +/* Copyright (C) 2003, 2004, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
29 This file is part of the GNU C Library.
31 The GNU C Library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
32 @@ -51,8 +51,8 @@ __lll_mutex_lock_wait:
43 Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@mindspring.com>