#12369: Add a gcc package
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reporter: jdemeyer
| Owner:
Type: task
| Status:
positive_review
Priority: major
| Milestone: sage-5.0
Component: packages
| Resolution:
Keywords:
| Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A
| Reviewers: Simon King
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer
| Merged in:
Dependencies: #12479, #12602, #12608, #12609, #12647, #10492, #12367,
#12368, #12405, #12570, #12574, #12423, #12425, #12456, #12363, #12223, #12515,
#12519, #12548, #12562, #12629, #12638, #12714, #12647 | Stopgaps:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Comment (by SimonKing):
I have some questions though: How could we make it possible to build the
GCC with graphite or with lto-support?
It should be possible to declare that one wants to build the GCC with
these additional features - in that case, the necessary optional packages
(the cloog_ppl package that I created respectively a libelf package, that
probably needs to be created) would be downloaded and installed before
building the gcc spkg.
Should that be done by yet another environment variable? I think there are
too many already.
But perhaps it could be given as a build target to `make`. I think the
following would be an acceptable way of usage:
1. `tar -xf sage-x.y.z.tar`, `cd sage-x.y.z/`
2. `make cloog_ppl libelf gcc` (installs `CLooG-PPL`, `libelf` and gcc
with their dependencies, downloading optional packages as required; the
install script of the gcc spkg would be modified such that graphite and
lto support would be automatically added if cloog-ppl or libelf are
present)
3. `make`, to build the rest of Sage.
Generally, I suggest that `make foo_bar toto` should install the latest
version of the foo_bar and toto spkgs ''in the given order'' including
dependencies (optional or standard), whereas `make` without arguments
would install all of Sage. Similarly, adding `parallel` to the make
targets should be the same what is now done by `SAGE_PARALLEL_SPKG_BUILD`.
To me, having make targets (automatically derived from spkg names) seems
nicer than to have hundreds of environment variables.
How should we proceed with these ideas (provided that you don't say that
they're nonsense)? Should there be a ''new'' ticket for a gcc with an
install script that automatically picks up cloog_ppl and libelf? Or should
this be done here, suspending the positive review?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12369#comment:207>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
