Subject: bug#39456: closed (Re: [bug#39456] [PATCH core-updates 0/6] glibc & binutils update)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 21:19:02 +0000

Your bug report

#39456: [PATCH core-updates 0/6] glibc & binutils update

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

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to [email-masked].

-- 
39456: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39456
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: [bug#39456] [PATCH core-updates 0/6] glibc & binutils update
From: Marius Bakke <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 22:18:41 +0100
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Marius Bakke <[email-masked]> writes:

> Marius Bakke (6):
>   gnu: linux-libre-headers: Update to 5.4.16.
>   gnu: dnsmasq: Fix build with linux-libre-headers >= 5.2.
>   gnu: binutils: Update to 2.34.
>   gnu: cross-binutils: Fix xtensa build with Binutils 2.34.
>   gnu: glibc: Update to 2.31.
>   gnu: libfaketime: Fix build with glibc 2.31.

I dropped the huge cross-binutils patch in favor of a simpler one that
keeps using Binutils 2.33.1 for the ath9k xtensa-elf target.

Pushed in 87d3e94d82..fedce7b2b4.

Subject: [PATCH core-updates 0/6] glibc & binutils update
From: Marius Bakke <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 18:59:55 +0100
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

These patches update Binutils and Glibc to the latest versions, as well as
Linux-Libre headers (I will change from 5.4.16 to 5.4.18 or whatever is
current before pushing).

Glibc 2.31 required patching every GCC version due to a size change that
trips libsanitizer.  It also requires patching older glibc versions due to
an unrelated change, but I'm not sure what the correct fix is.  Try
building [email-masked] with these patches to join the quest.

The GCC patches were pretty tricky, and unfortunately required small tweaks
between each version.  I would prefer if someone else tried cherry-picking
the relevant upstream commits to an older GCC and see if they get the same
result I did.  See the patch files for URLs.

Marius Bakke (6):
  gnu: linux-libre-headers: Update to 5.4.16.
  gnu: dnsmasq: Fix build with linux-libre-headers >= 5.2.
  gnu: binutils: Update to 2.34.
  gnu: cross-binutils: Fix xtensa build with Binutils 2.34.
  gnu: glibc: Update to 2.31.
  gnu: libfaketime: Fix build with glibc 2.31.

 gnu/local.mk                                  |    7 +
 gnu/packages/base.scm                         |   55 +-
 gnu/packages/check.scm                        |    4 +
 gnu/packages/commencement.scm                 |   15 +-
 gnu/packages/cross-base.scm                   |   15 +-
 gnu/packages/dns.scm                          |   14 +-
 gnu/packages/gcc.scm                          |    6 +
 gnu/packages/linux.scm                        |    8 +-
 .../binutils-revert-xtensa-shift.patch        | 4091 +++++++++++++++++
 .../gcc-4.9-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch      |   52 +
 .../gcc-6-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch        |   53 +
 .../gcc-7-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch        |   53 +
 .../gcc-8-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch        |   56 +
 .../gcc-9-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch        |   58 +
 .../glibc-2.29-supported-locales.patch        |   33 +
 .../patches/glibc-supported-locales.patch     |   11 +-
 16 files changed, 4503 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/binutils-revert-xtensa-shift.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/gcc-4.9-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/gcc-7-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/gcc-8-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/gcc-9-libsanitizer-mode-size.patch
 create mode 100644 gnu/packages/patches/glibc-2.29-supported-locales.patch

-- 
2.25.0