Re: gcc-10-source cross build for xtensa with D enabled fails due to missing texi macro. patch included
Yes, for the basic enablement I do have a draft patch (very simple):
https://salsa.debian.org/electronics-team/toolchains/gcc-xtensa-lx106/-/merge_requests/1
By inspection and my own manual tests/use it does work. But a sanity
test during build process would be indeed a good idea. I will take a look.
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 15:42, Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 02:22:11PM +0000, Witold Baryluk wrote:
> > So, it does appear that /usr/src/gcc-10/gcc-10.2.0-dfsg.tar.xz from
> > gcc-10-source 10.2.1-6 ,
> > doesn't have these patches applied. And the patches need to be applied
> > manually after unpacking.
> >
> > /usr/src/gcc-10/debian/README.source provides some information, but it
> > is a bit tricky:
> >
> > user@debian:~/xtensa-d/gcc-xtensa-lx106-8$ /usr/src/gcc-10/debian/rules patch
> > /usr/src/gcc-10/debian/rules:21: debian/rules.patch: No such file or directory
> > make: *** No rule to make target 'debian/rules.patch'. Stop.
> > user@debian:~/xtensa-d/gcc-xtensa-lx106-8
> >
> > Try to call make -f without changing directory:
> >
> > user@debian:~/xtensa-d/gcc-xtensa-lx106-8$ make -f
> > /usr/src/gcc-10/debian/rules.patch patch
> > make: Nothing to be done for 'patch'.
> > user@debian:~/xtensa-d/gcc-xtensa-lx106-8$
> >
> > But, I think this is simply because then debian/rules.patch runs
> > without proper variables from rules.defs applied, and $(patch_stamp)
> > is empty string.
> >
> > Not sure how to do all the patches, not that xtensa really need most
> > of them. Just the gdc-texinfo.patch
>
> I think the issue here is that I previously attempted to apply the
> Debian patches, but at some point they stopped being a basic
> debian_patches.txt file and turned into the current Makefile fragment
> nightmare. And this wasn't noticed because they're not actually
> necessary for the lx106 target.
>
> Witold, I have no experience with D. I'm happy to enable it for the
> gcc-xtensa-lx106 package but I'd feel a lot more comfortable doing so if
> you could provide a basic sanity test to compile like the existing C
> test in tests/compile-empty-lx106
>
> J.
>
> --
> ... Do you believe in happy endings?
Reply to: