From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Efraim Flashner Subject: bug#40006: 31/31: DRAFT gnu: bootstrap: Add support for the Hurd. Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 09:42:42 +0200 Message-ID: <20200316074242.GI927@E5400> References: <20200312065852.10633.59398@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200312065911.D981520B7E@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <874kuuvt9m.fsf@gnu.org> <87eetxrjtv.fsf@gnu.org> <87o8sxiiiv.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TKDEsImF70pdVIl+" Return-path: Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87o8sxiiiv.fsf@gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, 40006@debbugs.gnu.org List-Id: guix-devel.gnu.org --TKDEsImF70pdVIl+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 07:23:52PM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes: >=20 > >> For the sake of reducing complexity and keeping supported systems as > >> close to one another as possible, would it be an option to keep using > >> 2.0 for GNU/Hurd, like on the other systems? > ... > >> That would entail changing make-bootstrap.scm to use 2.0 instead of 2.2 > >> as a first step. And yeah, it=E2=80=99d also entail another full rebu= ild, which > >> I=E2=80=99m sorry for, but I think this kind of simplification pays of= f quickly. > >> > >> WDYT? > > > > Yes, let's do that. I'll also want to look at using gcc-5, that may > > solve our libstdc++-boot0/gcc-boot0 problem. I think it's weird that we > > build gcc-7 by default as bootstrap binary, while using that may not > > even work (and is certainly untested). >=20 > Yes; that worked and it simplifies things a lot. So, wip-hurd is using > guile-2 and gcc-5 now. Using gcc-5 allowed me to remove the puzzling > gcc-boot0 patch. >=20 > Just reset wip-hurd again; it was fully up to date with core-utils when > I started building the bootstrap-tarballs... Rebasing right now to > verify for a new round ;-) I haven't been looking at the wip-hurd branch that much, but I tested my libstdc++-boot0 patch on aarch64 using gcc-7 with bootstrap binary gcc-5 and it failed to build. I didn't investigate. --=20 Efraim Flashner =D7=90=D7=A4=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9D = =D7=A4=D7=9C=D7=A9=D7=A0=D7=A8 GPG key =3D A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted --TKDEsImF70pdVIl+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAl5vLfIACgkQQarn3Mo9 g1Ftxw/9GbkzKgtBNb3qkKeGRRUuYqVdOIHMcxVSSFBNxuBgkojJqU8KzwokUwPc 5cxrDZ4M+BPEhO8Kl0Kx7563l6U2ee0Om0G9e7WbTV9gdCkvpfnPabLRQIVLWR8X pqKuY8F4wHoks1by86nGjMji084r/vo3jML1d48RnHZ7Cndq1rRi2zAOehOmT7dd MDQPmBqY123o/mGhVl4XiQ5D2Juk6Mrf8vsHiKcGx0XMXlQ/si+ioqzSIYhVzy0A Y2aGEO+4vctg5Xmv0uWa9dmbrw18j7nnbJFKKoK5wZ+/97PhCbHqLMvaa7n9asi2 1QPnBRYtSIGRSVpoxETUspHS2MJe5SnBb9AIrimZUVPlC3cMUsvc4kzO39j7wJNT jOZb6ruc8OM2IHo5Wg0oovz8JtqsalpD7FVrpA1+7thn1aoeQ6zYwRWF9GtF/RVo j1x86bJ0Q+/Zl/imiZkiJUBYetr1sDE0z05G5mPWKd6ttzVfkyapE41rB9xk4RbN udT8JVaUub1ro+D3RYdJd4PoxgeZ5MwSX4qno/D6W7CBEYFH8xnRUmiqdCvQQxLP xvtdBs/AFMicRABoaXRBWpKlUYXETPYVEcT51yYZl9YRgAs3cGA0RlffzdgzpWDO D1HtooyjjXGfDvCILmSkoaXzzqUBPfifrhBy8b2QLmTscIOBn+U= =MCM0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --TKDEsImF70pdVIl+--