should libgcc depend on libc?

[Thorsten Glaser]

objdump -p says:

Dynamic Section:
  NEEDED      libc.so.37.0
  SONAME      libgcc_s.so.1.1
[...]

nm | sort says:

         U _exit
         U abort
         U dl_iterate_phdr
         U free
         U malloc
         U memcpy
         U memset
         U mprotect
         U perror
         U sysconf
         w _Jv_RegisterClasses
         w __cxa_finalize

Should I really not use -nostandardlibs for libgcc_s ?
I just got a linker warning because I had bumped libc
from .36.1 to .37.0 and am recompiling gcc... this
yields executables linking against libgcc_s (.1.1)
and libc (.37.0 AND .36.1). No problems, but a warning.

Also, libgcc could be used with libc-replacements this
way (not truly an issue with libgcc.so, but think of
bootloaders).

Do I overlook something?

Thanks,
//mirabile
-- 
I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just happens to hit upon it
when God enlightens him. Or only God invents algorithms, we merely copy them.
If you don't believe in God, just consider God as Nature if you won't deny
existence.		-- Coywolf Qi Hunt