> From: Segher Boessenkool > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:54:36PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > >> Fully agree with that. Coming up with a new scripts written in python2 > > >> really > > >> makes no sense. > > > > > > Then python cannot be a build requirement for GCC, since some of our > > > primary targets do not ship python3. > > > > Is it required that GCC must build with only the stock > > support elements on the primary target platforms? > > Not that I know. But why > should we make it hugely harder for essentially > no benefit? > > All the arguments > against awk were arguments against *the current scripts*. > > And yes, we can (and > perhaps should) rewrite those build scripts as C code, > just like all the other > gen* we have.
+1 > > Or is it allowed to require installing prerequisites? Yes, > > some platforms are so far behind they still don't ship Python 3, but > > installing Sometimes those are not behind, those could have no python for other reasons - maybe those are too forward? They just don't have python yet? > > it is straightforward. > > Installing it is not straightforward at all. I also agree with this; Please consider that both Python - 2 and 3 - they both do not support build chain on Windows with GCC for me, it is a showstopper
