toolchain.eclass and gcc 4.1 snapshots

R Hill skrev:
> Simon Strandman wrote:
>> It seems like toolchain.eclass does something wrong
when configuring 
>> gcc 4.1 snapshots. I decided to try gcc 4.1 on my
server so I created 
>> a gcc-4.1.1.20060324 ebuild and defined the
SNAPSHOT variable in it 
>> (current cvs has a lot of bugfixes since the
release). This is the 
>> way I've done it with gcc 4.0 and I never had any
problems then. The 
>> ebuild emerges without problems but it installs
files in both 
>> /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1-20060324 and 
>> /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1. So when I try
to emerge 
>> anything it always fails with errors like this:
>>
>> configure:2239: i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -O2
-march=pentium3 -pipe 
>> -fomit-frame-pointer -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1  
conftest.c  >&5
>>
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/../../../../i686-pc-lin
ux-gnu/bin/ld: 
>> cannot find -lgcc_s
>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>
>> Just copying over the files from one dir to the
other and then 
>> symlinking it works around the problems. Any ideas?
>
> This is caused by changes to the build system in 4.1
and GCC's 
> BASE-VER not matching portage's $ in snapshot
builds.  Most of the 
> system directories are set up by portage during
configure using $ 
> as part of the dirname. (eg. 
>
includedir=/usr/<lib>/gcc/<chost>/$/include)
.  However, libdir and 
> libexecdir aren't set by portage (because they
generate really strange 
> paths w/ --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs in GCC
3.3/3.4) and 
> default to
/usr/<lib>/gcc/<chost>/BASE-VER/blah.  When
$ != 
> BASE-VER, wackiness ensues.
>
> Try this in your ebuild:
>
> src_unpack() {
>     toolchain_src_unpack
>
>     echo ${PV/_/-} > "$"/gcc/BASE-VER
>     echo "" >
"$"/gcc/DATESTAMP
> }
>
> --de.
>
Thanks for the help! But now it fails with this error:

<built-in>:1: internal compiler error: in
define__GNUC__, at c-cppbuiltin.c:296
Please submit a full bug report,


This has been reported in gcc bug #19372 and apperantly it
has something 
to do with the version string. :(
-- 
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list

Simon Strandman skrev:
> R Hill skrev:
>> Simon Strandman wrote:
>>> It seems like toolchain.eclass does something
wrong when configuring 
>>> gcc 4.1 snapshots. I decided to try gcc 4.1 on
my server so I 
>>> created a gcc-4.1.1.20060324 ebuild and defined
the SNAPSHOT 
>>> variable in it (current cvs has a lot of
bugfixes since the 
>>> release). This is the way I've done it with
gcc 4.0 and I never had 
>>> any problems then. The ebuild emerges without
problems but it 
>>> installs files in both
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1-20060324 
>>> and /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1. So
when I try to emerge 
>>> anything it always fails with errors like this:
>>>
>>> configure:2239: i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -O2
-march=pentium3 -pipe 
>>> -fomit-frame-pointer -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1  
conftest.c  >&5
>>>
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/../../../../i686-pc-lin
ux-gnu/bin/ld: 
>>> cannot find -lgcc_s
>>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>>
>>> Just copying over the files from one dir to the
other and then 
>>> symlinking it works around the problems. Any
ideas?
>>
>> This is caused by changes to the build system in
4.1 and GCC's 
>> BASE-VER not matching portage's $ in snapshot
builds.  Most of 
>> the system directories are set up by portage during
configure using 
>> $ as part of the dirname. (eg. 
>>
includedir=/usr/<lib>/gcc/<chost>/$/include)
.  However, libdir 
>> and libexecdir aren't set by portage (because they
generate really 
>> strange paths w/
--enable-version-specific-runtime-libs in GCC 
>> 3.3/3.4) and default to
/usr/<lib>/gcc/<chost>/BASE-VER/blah.  When 
>> $ != BASE-VER, wackiness ensues.
>>
>> Try this in your ebuild:
>>
>> src_unpack() {
>>     toolchain_src_unpack
>>
>>     echo ${PV/_/-} >
"$"/gcc/BASE-VER
>>     echo "" >
"$"/gcc/DATESTAMP
>> }
>>
>> --de.
>>
> Thanks for the help! But now it fails with this error:
>
> <built-in>:1: internal compiler error: in
define__GNUC__, at 
> c-cppbuiltin.c:296
> Please submit a full bug report,
>
>
> This has been reported in gcc bug #19372 and apperantly
it has 
> something to do with the version string. :(
I opened a bug about it:
http://
bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127724
-- 
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list