Re: gcc-10-source cross build for xtensa with D enabled fails due to missing texi macro. patch included
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 10:27:54AM +0000, Witold Baryluk wrote:
> Have you had time to look at my MR draft I sent before?
This fell off my radar because of the build problems due to not pulling
in the extra required patches. I've done some cleanup of the package
build so the extra Debian patches are now applied, which helps matters.
I'm not clear we want to add the D compiler to the default package
rather than putting it into a separate package?
Also unfortunately at this stage of the release cycle I doubt we can
make the case for it making bullseye.
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 16:45, Witold Baryluk <witold.baryluk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > A simple (but not-too-simple) test is now included in MR:
> >
> > https://salsa.debian.org/electronics-team/toolchains/gcc-xtensa-lx106/-/merge_requests/1/diffs
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 15:52, Witold Baryluk <witold.baryluk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.
--
] https://www.earth.li/~noodles/ [] I may be cool Beavis, but I can't [
] PGP/GPG Key @ the.earth.li [] change the future. [
] via keyserver, web or email. [] [
] RSA: 4096/0x94FA372B2DA8B985 [] [
Reply to: