Hi, (Well, something appears to me weird: rebuild Gnash which is a C++ software using another toolchain implies a Rust-world rebuild.)
On Wed, 03 May 2023 at 23:36, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: > Note that it’s not the same version (0.12.0 vs. 0.8.1), but the result > is the same with 0.8. The reason is that Rust packages aren’t like > “real” packages; the sources are eventually aggregated in whatever > package needs them. Hum, ok. >> $ guix graph --path gnash -e '(@@ (gnu packages gcc) gcc-11)' -t bag >> guix graph: error: no path from 'gnash@0.8.11-0.583ccbc' to 'gcc@11.3.0' > > That’s because you’re not looking at the “right” GCC 11 package object: Hum, this “right” looks weird to me. I read from (gnu packages gcc): --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- ;; Note: When changing the default gcc version, update ;; the gcc-toolchain-* definitions. (define-public gcc gcc-11) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Then from (gnu packages commencent): --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (define gcc-boot0 (package (inherit gcc) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Then, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (define gcc-final ;; The final GCC. (package (inherit gcc-boot0) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- And, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (define-public gcc-toolchain (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-final)) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Well, I am lost with the difference between gcc-final and gcc-11. Last, what lost me is this: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (define-public gcc-toolchain-4.8 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-4.8)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-4.9 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-4.9)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-5 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-5)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-6 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-6)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-7 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-7)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-8 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-8)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-9 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-9)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-10 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-10)) (define-public gcc-toolchain-11 gcc-toolchain) (define-public gcc-toolchain-12 (make-gcc-toolchain gcc-12)) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- compared to ’gcc-toolchain’ which uses gcc-final. Why not gcc-11 as all the others? It would make it consistent with the rest, no? Cheers, simon