Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 15 Oct 2018 13:33:05 -0700
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>, "freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: powerpc64 example, base/binutils presence vs. devel/powerpc64-gcc build failure: "phase: build-depends" confused then gcc config aborts build
Message-ID:  <e462605b-463e-1530-928a-6d6302483ab5@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfrrYNTcqNCRXU5EVrNMH7rTpX4Ld6h25LWvRjWqC3NOWw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <925D3E9A-4EF0-4B49-83D4-C9574170EB66@yahoo.com> <4b7cb935-7643-da6c-261a-d69e9f155c78@FreeBSD.org> <CANCZdfqerMwkpAQwYbbi7fKbv9vDT=rTj5kofyju54FXe_hOEw@mail.gmail.com> <27396a4d-7fe9-2540-dfd2-28ae75109e01@FreeBSD.org> <CANCZdfrrYNTcqNCRXU5EVrNMH7rTpX4Ld6h25LWvRjWqC3NOWw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/15/18 11:55 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 12:25 PM John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org <mailto:jhb@freebsd.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 10/15/18 11:06 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 10:20 AM John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org <mailto:jhb@freebsd.org> <mailto:jhb@freebsd.org <mailto:jhb@freebsd.org>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     On 10/12/18 6:51 AM, Mark Millard wrote:
>     >     > The following is from attempting to build devel/powerpc-gcc
>     >     > via poudriere-devel on the powerpc64 system after having
>     >     > bootstrapped via (in part) base/binutils and the .txz
>     >     > produced on the host (amd64).
>     >     >
>     >     > Looks like having both:
>     >     >
>     >     > /usr/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-*
>     >     > and:
>     >     > /usr/local/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-*
>     >     >
>     >     > in a powerpc64 environment confuses "phase: build-depends"
>     >     > in poudriere for the devel/powerpc64-gcc build:
>     >
>     >     Ah, I could see that.  I had kept the longer binary names with the full tuple
>     >     since the original base/binutils had them, but I've considered stripping them
>     >     as we only really need /usr/bin/as, etc. for the base system.  I hadn't gotten
>     >     to the point of trying to build any ports with base/* as I'm still trying to
>     >     just do a buildworld (and running poudriere in a qemu image of mips64 would
>     >     be very unpleasant).  I think probably base/binutils just needs to drop the
>     >     names with a full tuple if possible.
>     >
>     >
>     > Having symlinks to the long names plays nicer with autoconf, of at least has in the past. Our build system doesn't care, though...
> 
>     I think it only plays nicer for the port.  We've never had /usr/bin/x86_64-freebsd-ld
>     linked to /usr/bin/ld in base, and base/binutils' role is to provide /usr/bin/as,
>     /usr/bin/ld, etc.
> 
> 
> The tools built by xdev did, though not that specific link... I do agree that if we do this, it's only of marginal benefit.

The xdev tools are probably more inline with the devel/<arch>-binutils and
devel/<arch>-gcc ports which do install those links to be cross-build friendly.

-- 
John Baldwin

                                                                            



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e462605b-463e-1530-928a-6d6302483ab5>