On 04/04/2019 20:54, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 4/4/19 1:18 PM, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: >> On 03/04/2019 22:49, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: >>> On 02/04/2019 22:21, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: >>>> On 29/03/2019 11:16, Kevin Buckley via lfs-dev wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 14:35, James B via lfs-dev >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> And then Python (which meson depends on) isn't exactly straightforward >>>>>> to bootstrap, >>>>>> and doubly so for multilib environments. >>>>> >>>>> Well, don't forget that someone in GLibc-land decied that they should >>>>> make building >>>>> GLibc dependent on Python3, after it have never been subservient to an >>>>> interpreter >>>>> before, >>>> >>>> You sure? I think it has been using perl for years. Maybe perl is not >>>> required >>>> anymore now (need to test). >>> >>> As a matter of fact, perl is no more required for building glibc. More tests >>> are said to fail, though (28 FAIL instead of 4, out of more than 5400). >>> >> >> For the record: the 24 tests that fail, all fail because they run "mtrace", >> which is a perl script. > > This is getting confusing. The subject is meson, but we are talking about > perl, python, and glibc. > > Perhaps a clarification would be helpful here. >
Well, sorry about that... I kept answering one comment (not mine), which explained that Python was now needed for glibc, and that glibc was not subservient to an interpreter before... Maybe it is better if I make a message summarizing my findings for glibc. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
