Control: reassign -1 tech-ctte Dear technical committee,
I ask you to overrule the gcc maintainer and rule that the following hunks to the gcc-4.9 package must be reverted: diff -u gcc-4.9-4.9.1/debian/rules.defs gcc-4.9-4.9.1/debian/rules.defs --- gcc-4.9-4.9.1/debian/rules.defs +++ gcc-4.9-4.9.1/debian/rules.defs @@ -125,6 +125,9 @@ $(error Invalid architecure.) endif +# Force this, people get confused about the default. See #760770. +with_deps_on_target_arch_pkgs := + # including unversiond symlinks for binaries #with_unversioned = yes @@ -1449,9 +1447,7 @@ #ifeq ($(trunk_build),yes) # no_biarch_libs := yes #endif -ifdef DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH - no_biarch_libs := yes -endif +no_biarch_libs := ifeq ($(no_biarch_libs),yes) with_lib64gcc := no Rationale: Prior to these changes it was possible to build a gcc cross compiler with different properties from the default build by setting with_deps_on_target_arch_pkgs=yes and DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH=yes. This functionality is extensively tested[1] and in particular provides the only known working way to bootstrap new architectures. I am maintaining[2] this functionality by submitting patches to the gcc package. I acknowledge that the gcc maintainer claims that this method is broken. His reasons seem to resonate mostly with in-archive cross toolchains and not with throw-away cross toolchains used for bootstrapping. I acknowledge that supporting this alternative method of building cross compilers puts additional work on the gcc maintainer, but this work is mostly limited to merging patches. Why is with_deps_on_target_arch_pkgs needed? Without this flag, gcc emits dependencies on libc*-$arch-cross. In order to satisfy these dependencies binary packages from glibc have to be repacked and renamed. When using the resulting cross toolchain to build further Debian packages there are two choices, both of which are bad: * Newly cross built packages also depend on libc6-$arch-cross. This will make them different from natively built packages and in particular makes debootstrap fail. * Newly cross built packages keep their dependency on libc6. This will make them uninstallable in the build chroot, because there is no foreign arch libc package that can be co-installed with the aforementioned libc*-$arch-cross. Either option makes the bootstrap of a new architecture fail. Why is DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH needed? There currently is a bug in rebootstrap that makes building multilib enabled cross-toolchains fail. Thus far I failed to figure out the reasons for this failure (beyond knowing that gcc looks for crti.o in the wrong directory). So in the spirit of having something working rather than nothing, this fiddle is needed to bootstrap multilib-enabled architectures now. I intend to eliminate the need DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH. Timing I believe that it is very bad timing to disable a well tested functionality given the imminent freeze. This is also a reason for me to believe that reverting the aforementioned hunks poses little additional work on the gcc maintainer: There won't be much changes to put into jessie. The subject of this bug shall be limited to jessie, because there is much time to resolve the dispute for jessie+1 in a reasonable manner and there is reason to believe that the gcc maintainer will supports finding a resolution. Helmut [1] https://wiki.debian.org/HelmutGrohne/rebootstrap [2] #716795 #742358 #742539 #743718 #743764 #744265 #744782 #745267 #747526 #751001 #751919 #758408 #743342 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141026145056.ga17...@alf.mars
