Janneke Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > For the current situtation (that's less than great and are > working on to resolve), making essential GNU packages less > bootstrappable is of no consequence.
OK. That's what I conjectured. Thanks for confirming. > Cleaning-up the full-source > bootstrap and making it more or less future-proof, might be challenged > by such a new dependency. I see. So, I wondered whether Python can be compiled by the last C-only GCC, gcc-4.7.3. And yes, Python-3.7.17 (the minimum supported version for gnulib-tool) compiles with gcc-4.7.3. Whereas a newer version, Python-3.12.2, doesn't. > As an example, we have been working on the > RISC-V bootstrap for about a year with three people. One of the > problems here is that RISC-V was only added to a non-bootstrappable > version of GCC: 7.5.0, while the GCC team failed to maintain their last > bootstrappable version: 4.7.4. In other words, the RISC-V backend > needed to backported and someone else now needs to maintain a > bootstrappable version of GCC. Oh, you don't allow yourself to use a cross-compiler from, say, x86? I mean, running a complete x86 bootstrap, followed by the creation of a cross-compiled RISC-V compiler, in a virtualized environment on RISC-V could work in theory (although it would be very slow). Bruno
