Hey,
> clang-runtime requires a similar fix for CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH. No idea
> what's up with GHC@8.4 yet, but unsurprisingly removing libc from the
> include paths does not make a difference.
Closing this one, thanks for pushing!
Mathieu
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hi!
>
> Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
>
>>> Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
>>> filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment-variable in set-paths.
>>
>> This is also quite tricky, because the "libc" input passed to set-paths
>> must
Hi!
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
>> Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
>> filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment-variable in set-paths.
>
> This is also quite tricky, because the "libc" input passed to set-paths
> must not be removed from C_INCLUDE_PATH i
Hello Janneke,
> Do you have a patch/branch where I can see this related error? If mes
> builds are an exception, it could be nice to solve it there? Or is
> this a Qemu thing and is Qemu the only package that suffers from this?
>
> Trying to help here, but I'm not sure if I understand what's
Mathieu Othacehe writes:
Hello!
>> Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
>> filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment-variable in set-paths.
>
> This is also quite tricky, because the "libc" input passed to set-paths
> must not be removed from C_INCLUDE_PATH
Marius Bakke writes:
> Hello Mathieu & Ludo,
>
> (+ janneke)
>
> Mathieu Othacehe writes:
>
>>> Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
>>> filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment-variable in set-paths.
>>
>> This is also quite tricky, because the "libc" inp
Hello Mathieu & Ludo,
(+ janneke)
Mathieu Othacehe writes:
>> Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
>> filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment-variable in set-paths.
>
> This is also quite tricky, because the "libc" input passed to set-paths
> must not be
> Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
> filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment-variable in set-paths.
This is also quite tricky, because the "libc" input passed to set-paths
must not be removed from C_INCLUDE_PATH in (gnu packages commencement)
for mes p
Hey Marius,
> Did you get anywhere with this? As Ludovic mentioned, it might make
> sense to work around it in gnu-build-system too if patching GCC turns
> out to be difficult.
Yup, turned out patching GCC was too difficult. I'm experimenting a
filter over inputs passed to set-path-environment
Hi Mathieu,
Mathieu Othacehe writes:
> So if it's ok for you, I'll try to implement a GCC hack so that we can
> keep using C_INCLUDE_PATH on core-updates and have QEMU building, as you
> proposed.
Did you get anywhere with this? As Ludovic mentioned, it might make
sense to work around it in gn
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Incidentally, do we have problems building anything other than QEMU?
The only other regression I've noticed with the C_INCLUDE_PATH change is
that GHC 8.4 fails to build -- previously we at least got to GHC 8.6.
The error message does not make much sense to me (somethi
Hi,
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
> About the environment issue, we have the same problem on master. You can
> run the following command:
>
> ./pre-inst-env guix environment -C -e '(@@ (gnu packages commencement)
> coreutils-final)' -- echo -e '#include \n int main() {return
> 0;}' > test.c && gc
Oops wrong shortcut, sorry!
> I’d rather go for #2. To do that, we could modify the ‘set-paths’ phase
> to manually remove glibc from C_INCLUDE_PATH (fragile), or we could
> modify GCC (perhaps removing the ‘remove_duplicates’ call for SYSTEM).
>
> Either way, this wouldn’t work well with ‘guix
Hey!
> I’d rather go for #2. To do that, we could modify the ‘set-paths’ phase
> to manually remove glibc from C_INCLUDE_PATH (fragile), or we could
> modify GCC (perhaps removing the ‘remove_duplicates’ call for SYSTEM).
>
> Either way, this wouldn’t work well with ‘guix environment’, where gl
Hi,
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
>> So is it expected that C_INCLUDE_PATH comes before the hard-coded GCC
>> include directory? How can we work around that?
>
> Turns out, the best source of documentation here is
> gcc/incpath.c. Here's a summary of my understanding.
>
> Header search list:
>
> *
Hey,
> So is it expected that C_INCLUDE_PATH comes before the hard-coded GCC
> include directory? How can we work around that?
Turns out, the best source of documentation here is
gcc/incpath.c. Here's a summary of my understanding.
Header search list:
* QUOTE
-> -iquote
* BRACKET
-> -I go
Hi Mathieu,
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
> On master, when building qemu, this is the gcc include path (obtained
> with "gcc -v -x c -E /dev/null"):
>
> /gnu/store/adm2cx3ayabn1sp84nnjsk0672m800ip-flex-2.6.4/include
> /gnu/store/l86azr7r3p5631wj3kk329jl1y1mpjgy-bzip2-1.0.6/include
> ...
>
> /g
Hello,
> On master there’s pretty much the same command as above, with ‘-m16’,
> and “yet it works”.
>
> https://ci.guix.gnu.org/log/ymzp5yz2r3zfw4xczwwlykyjv2kqcqs0-qemu-4.2.0
On master, when building qemu, this is the gcc include path (obtained
with "gcc -v -x c -E /dev/null"):
--8<---
Hi,
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
> On core-updates, qemu-minimal (4.2.0), fails to build. This seems to be
> the same issue as this bug. The error is:
>
> In file included from
> /gnu/store/jsjsczgr8xdnbdminl7lm2v56b7dq7lq-glibc-2.31/include/features.h:489:0,
> from
> /gnu/store/
Hello,
On core-updates, qemu-minimal (4.2.0), fails to build. This seems to be
the same issue as this bug. The error is:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
In file included from
/gnu/store/jsjsczgr8xdnbdminl7lm2v56b7dq7lq-glibc-2.31/include/features.h:489:0,
20 matches
Mail list logo
