I notice that in your gcc version of the Arm Toolchain you use uclibc as the c library. Is there any reason for this ? This is the normal choice for uclinux targets but not standalone. The reason I ask is uclibc library falls under LGPL license which can cause issues if statically linking your application. Regards sjo
Actually, LGPL (Library or "Lesser" GPL) is the license that allows you to use a library, statically linked to your code, without claiming that the entire program is then a derivative work requiring distribution of the source. The "normal" GPL is the one that requires you to release your source if you statically link to any GPLed code. (This point rules out using the GNU libc, for example. I was somewhat astounded a year or so ago when investigating 68HC11 tools to see that a major vendor was shipping the GNU libc++ with their tools. Perfectly legal, but also nearly useless for commercial closed-source development.) The BSD libc might be an even less encumbered alternative. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/lib/libc/
But even with statically linked LGPL lib such as uclibc you have to provide the end user the obj files so they can relink to a newer uclibc if they so wish. Obviously not a problem with shared libs. Unless my understanding is incorrect. Regards sjo