On 01/25/2016 09:40 AM, Fabrice Desré wrote:
On 01/25/2016 09:30 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
For example, for a long time b2g partners held back our minimum
supported gcc. Now that there are no such partner requirements, perhaps
we can consider bumping up the minimum to gcc 4.8? (bug 1175546)
We moved to 4.8 on b2g a year ago: see
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1056337
Who's behind? :P
I am.
The b2g rooting hazard analysis build is still using gcc 4.7. I spent a
bunch of effort trying to upgrade it to gcc 4.9, but ran into a variety
of issues I didn't understand related to the b2g build system (both on
my local laptop and on a build slave), and finally gave up in despair.
But the b2g hazard build is also a mozharness tangle of mixins and weird
inheritance structure (as is the older b2g emulator build), and those
are being replaced with taskcluster-based builds.
In the last 2 weeks, I've been working on redoing the b2g hazard build
on top of taskcluster and mulet. Partly because it's mulet, and partly
because it uses Docker and simple shell scripts, it has been *way* way
way way way *way* easier and more pleasant to deal with. I have it
working locally, so I hope to have the b2g hazard builds upgraded to gcc
4.9 soonish.
But that's on top of mulet, which means it isn't compiling any of the
MOZ_B2G_RIL code, which means it has lost some coverage over the
original build. If I understand correctly, the "right" thing to do would
be to use an emulator build instead, but that means that the b2g build
system gets involved again, which is complex and slings around a lot
more data, so everything is far slower to work on.
With FxOS becoming tier 3, I am disinclined to even attempt the emulator
version. In theory, it would be a straightforward adaptation of the
mulet hazard build script. In practice, it would take a while to even
test out that theory.
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
