From owner-freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Wed May 8 17:21:30 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214F1158E929 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE18C86347 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 72262158E928; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:29 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: toolchain@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FC75158E926 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBB886344 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3223C9C37 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x48HLSLK002599 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:28 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x48HLSLJ002597 for toolchain@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 8 May 2019 17:21:28 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 237688] lang/gcc8 fails to build: /usr/local/bin/ld: /wrkdirs/usr/ports/lang/gcc8/work/.build/./gcc/liblto_plugin.so: error loading plugin: Service unavailable Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 17:21:27 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: dim@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 17:21:30 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D237688 --- Comment #8 from Dimitry Andric --- (In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #5) > So, it was a non-default setting after all. ;-) >=20 > That said, is there a better way of reasonably handling this within our > ports framework? Something like >=20 > .if $(binutils built statically) > IGNORE=3D GCC requires dynamically linked binutils > .endif Something like that, or somehow disable LTO plugins when building gcc, or at least warning about it. > Or perhaps drop the STATIC option from devel/binutils? Is this an=20 > important one for users? I think this option mirrors what we have in the base system, where for apparently historical reasons, most toolchain components (cc, ld, etc) are built statically. Most likely, the idea was to be able to get yourself out = of certain situations where the system is messed up, and then being able to rebuild it. It was added in ports r434650 by bdrewery, maybe he remembers what it was m= eant for? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=