GNU bug report logs - #19733
disfunctional gcc binary when GCJ or gfortran is installed

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
Subject: bug#19733: closed (disfunctional gcc binary when GCJ or gfortran
 is installed)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 06:30:03 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your bug report

#19733: disfunctional gcc binary when GCJ or gfortran is installed

which was filed against the guix package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 19733 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
19733: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=19733
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: 19733-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: disfunctional gcc binary when GCJ or gfortran is installed
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 07:29:46 +0100

Fixed with 82f145ef7aef8f4d28a144ee8efcadf3fdd4b877

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus <at> mdc-berlin.de>
To: <bug-guix <at> gnu.org>
Subject: disfunctional gcc binary when GCJ or gfortran is installed
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 17:30:00 +0100

Hi Guix,

installing the gcj or the gfortran package, my profile's /bin directory
gets a gcc link.  If I use Guix as a package manager on top of another
system that has a working installation of the GNU C compiler and my
profile bin path has preference to all other items in PATH, then I end
up with a disfunctional gcc binary.

gcj as well as gfortran come with a couple of binaries (gcc, gcc-ar,
etc) that do not constitute a working C compiler.  Trying to build an
application with

   ./configure
   make
   sudo make install

"configure" complains about gcc not being able to compile C code.

Other distributions seem to remove common binaries like gcc, gcc-ar, etc
from their gfortran packages and it seems that we should too in order to
avoid conflicts.  It seems that neither gfortran nor gcj actually need
these binaries to function.

Should we add another phase to the definitions of "custom-gcc" and "gcj"
to remove these binaries?

~~ Ricardo

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.