On 28/03/2025 2:05 pm, Anthony PERARD wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 05:43:02PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> The $(eval $(check-y)) is badly positioned: >> >> xen.git/xen$ make >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> HOSTCC tools/fixdep >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.host:108: tools/fixdep] Error 1 >> HOSTCC tools/symbols >> *** FATAL BUILD ERROR: Xen requires at least GCC 0x150100 >> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.host:108: tools/symbols] Error 1 >> make: *** [Makefile:610: xen] Error 2 >> >> It is involved every time Config.mk is included, rather than once per `make` >> invocation. > It's worth than that ;-). $(eval $(check-y)) doesn't print anything, it > actually replace $(CC) by something that just print this error message > and thus refuse to build anything.
Oh, that's far worse. > So even if the eval was only done > once, you'll still have this stream of error message. It appears the author didn't know about $(error). > Anyway, is this check still useful somehow? Or could we replace it by a > check in ./configure for the tools and one in either Kconfig or > "xen/Makefile" for the hypervisor? I'm quite sure it predates ./configure. But I don't think there's any reason to keep it around in this form - like this it's borderline useless. ~Andrew
