For the 3rd time, again I believe that I have built i686-linux `hello'
without using any bootstrap inputs. This time, I have actually built
./pre-inst-env guix build --system=i686-linux hello
on x86_64 (Previously, I did most development in a x86 VM which hides
problems with --system= setting) and I verified that
./pre-inst-env guix graph --type=bag -e '(begin (use-modules (guix
packages) (gnu packages base)) (%current-system "i686-linux") hello)'
does not include any `glibc-bootstrap', `gcc-bootstrap' or `binutils-bootstrap'.
I found that using package-with-explicit-inputs often still sometimes
has these packages leak in. I didn't manage to find out how or why.
Using :implicit-inputs #f and #:guile %bootstrap-guile produces a clean
package. So I rewrote
diffutils-boot0
findutils-boot0
file-boot0
perl-boot0
m4-boot0
bison-boot0
to use that instead.
Maybe we want to look at package-with-explicit-inputs and change/fix it?
Also, i worked on glibc-2.16.0 to *really* remove all shreads of sunrpc.
That was more work than expected but finally that fixed building
gettext-boot0
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
gettext-boot0: netdb.h: fatal error: rpc/netdb.h: No such file or directory
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Building bison-boot0, I removed the added `-D' flag to ranlib
bison-boot0:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
#:make-flags `("ARFLAGS=crD"
,,(match (%current-system)
;; ranlib: '-D': No such file
("i686-linux" "RANLIB=ranlib")
(_ "RANLIB=ranlib -D"))
"V=1"))))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
AFAICS, bootstrap-cross-boot0 does not support the -D flag. How did
this ever work -- did binutils-bootstrap-0 always leak-in here?
Next, I made two very ugly hacks to build libstdc++-boot0 and gcc-boot0
libstdc++-boot0:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
;; FIXME: why doesn't this package build libstdc++.so.6.0.20,
;; when gcc-mesboot builds it fine?
;; libtool: install:
/gnu/store/7swwdnq02lqk4xkd8740fxdj1h4va38l-bootstrap-binaries-0/bin/install -c
.libs/libstdc++.so.6.0.20
/gnu/store/np5pmdlwfin3vmqk88chh0fgs0ncki79-libstdc++-boot0-4.8.5/lib/libstdc++.so.6.0.20
;;
/gnu/store/7swwdnq02lqk4xkd8740fxdj1h4va38l-bootstrap-binaries-0/bin/install:
cannot stat '.libs/libstdc++.so.6.0.20': No such file or directory
(add-after 'build 'copy-libstdc++-
(lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys)
(let ((gcc (assoc-ref %build-inputs "gcc"))
(out (assoc-ref outputs "out")))
(copy-file (string-append gcc "/lib/libstdc++.so.6.0.20")
(string-append "src/.libs/libstdc++.so.6.0.20"))
#t)))))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
gcc-boot0:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
,(match (%current-system)
("i686-linux"
'(add-after 'build 'libtool-workaround
(lambda _
;; libtool: install:
/gnu/store/7swwdnq02lqk4xkd8740fxdj1h4va38l-bootstrap-binaries-0/bin/install -c
.libs/libcc1.so.0.0.0
/gnu/store/8qf47i99nxz9jvrmq5va0g3q1yvs3x74-gcc-cross-boot0-5.5.0-lib/lib/./libcc1.so.0.0.0
;;
/gnu/store/7swwdnq02lqk4xkd8740fxdj1h4va38l-bootstrap-binaries-0/bin/install:
cannot stat '.libs/libcc1.so.0.0.0': No such file or directory
(system* "touch"
"libcc1/.libs/libcc1.so.0.0.0"
"libcc1/.libs/libcc1plugin.so.0.0.0"))))
(_ 'identity))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Updated the wip-bootstrap branch @ savannah.
I'm now working on a patch for Mes to allow upgrading Nyacc to 0.86.0
which will of course trigger a full rebuild.
TODO:
* have someone reproduce these results
* review the wip-bootstrap branch
* understand the need for the hacks I introduced, clean them up
* check wip-bootstrap doesn't break other architectures/cross build, ...
* verify that wip-bootstrap builds reproducible (ranlib -D?)
* merge it, or squash the 207 commits into a single or at most a handful of
commits?
* refactor the full source bootstrap*)
* other architectures
* gash/geesh
* ...?
janneke
*) - the initial gnu triplet is currently binutils-2.20, glibc-2.2.5 and
gcc-2.95.3.
one reason for choosing this triplet is that newer versions depend on a
richer libc. while grafting the guix bootstrap onto this mes triplet, the
Mes C Library was enriched; so possibly we could target a newer
triplet: gcc-3.x, or maybe we want to enrich Mes C Library further.
- gcc-mesboot-4.9.4 was inserted between gcc-mesboot1-4.7.4, it would
be nice if one of those could be removed.
- gcc-mesboot-4.9.4 is compiled with --enable-shared; that may be
cause of the ugly libstdc++/gcc-boot0 libtool hacks? OTOH, it
provides the libstdc++.so.6.0.20 that we need in libstdc++-boot0?
