GNU bug report logs - #42339
[PATCH core-updates] gnu: glibc-intermediate: Fixup the pre-configure phase.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Jakub Kądziołka <kuba <at> kadziolka.net>
Cc: 42339 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#42339] [PATCH core-updates] gnu: glibc-intermediate: Fixup the pre-configure phase.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:00:22 +0200

Hello,

Jakub Kądziołka <kuba <at> kadziolka.net> skribis:

> * gnu/packages/commencement.scm
>   (glibc-final-with-bootstrap-bash)[arguments]: Don't patch sunrpc,
>   as it's no longer required. Tweak C_INCLUDE_PATH and
>   CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH instead of CPATH.
> ---
>
> Hi Guix,
>
> I have stumbled upon this phase while I was working on making substitute
> not fail silently. Turns out this substitution is no longer necessary
> since we aren't building with --enable-obsolete-rpc anymore. I'm not
> sure about the unsetenv parts, though. Switching them to
> {C,CPLUS}_INCLUDE_PATH, which is where the header paths actually are
> right now, did not change how `guix graph --type=references` looks for
> glibc-final (nor glibc-final-with-bootstrap-bash, for that matter).
>
> The phase itself was introduced in...
>
> commit 1c93be5600fb90a64cbbdf7a55061902d2ff150a
> Author: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
> Date:   Sat Jun 7 17:23:53 2014 +0200
>
>     gnu: glibc: Make sure the bootstrap libc is not in $CPATH.
>
>     This fixes a bug whereby the bootstrap-glibc headers could be picked up
>     when building libc.so, which could be noticed by the fact that the
>     .debug files contained references to bootstrap-glibc.
>
>     * gnu/packages/base.scm (glibc-final-with-bootstrap-bash)[arguments]:
>       Add 'pre-configure' phase.
>       [inputs]: Remove 'alist-delete' call.
>
> The debug output does not refer to a bootstrap glibc anymore whether the phase
> is there or not, though it does refer to gcc-cross-boot0:lib. Does this
> mean that the phase is simply obsolete, and only the hurd parts should
> remain, or is the reference to gcc a bug? Perhaps gcc should have a
> separate output for the includes it provides (stdarg and such) so that
> this reference doesn't bring in the whole mesboot tree? This would
> improve the closure of gcc-toolchain:debug...

Oooh, nice.  LGTM!

Please confirm that nothing breaks (everything builds at least up to
‘gcc-final’) and you can push to ‘core-updates’.

Thank you!

Ludo’.

Previous Next

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