Josselin Poiret <dev@jpoiret.xyz> writes:

> Christopher Baines <mail@cbaines.net> writes:
>> I think the use of coreutils-boot0 in the source for gcc-boot0 is a
>> problematic change introduced in core-updates [2], at least
>> coreutils-boot0 fails to build.
>
> Just to recap, as you mentioned on IRC, the coreutils configure phase
> seems to miss hurd.h, even though it is included in the bootstrap glibc.
> It might be due to the coreutils upgrade, since I don't see what else
> could've changed this derivation.  I don't have a childhurd at the
> moment (because a cross-compiled Hurd fails to run), so I can't really
> test native compilation as above :(

I think the first bit to look at here is not that coreutils-boot0 is
failing, but why it's started being used, because I'm not even sure
about that.