powerpc64 example, base/binutils presence vs. devel/powerpc64-gcc build failure: "phase: build-depends" confused then gcc config aborts build

[Warner Losh]

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 10:20 AM John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On 10/12/18 6:51 AM, Mark Millard wrote:
> > The following is from attempting to build devel/powerpc-gcc
> > via poudriere-devel on the powerpc64 system after having
> > bootstrapped via (in part) base/binutils and the .txz
> > produced on the host (amd64).
> >
> > Looks like having both:
> >
> > /usr/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-*
> > and:
> > /usr/local/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-*
> >
> > in a powerpc64 environment confuses "phase: build-depends"
> > in poudriere for the devel/powerpc64-gcc build:
>
> Ah, I could see that.  I had kept the longer binary names with the full
> tuple
> since the original base/binutils had them, but I've considered stripping
> them
> as we only really need /usr/bin/as, etc. for the base system.  I hadn't
> gotten
> to the point of trying to build any ports with base/* as I'm still trying
> to
> just do a buildworld (and running poudriere in a qemu image of mips64 would
> be very unpleasant).  I think probably base/binutils just needs to drop the
> names with a full tuple if possible.
>

Having symlinks to the long names plays nicer with autoconf, of at least
has in the past. Our build system doesn't care, though...

Warner

-- 
> John Baldwin
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-toolchain at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "
> freebsd-toolchain-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>