Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
> The GNU Binutils are a collection of binary tools. The main ones are: > * ld - the GNU linker. > * as - the GNU assembler. > Most of these programs use BFD, the Binary File Descriptor library, to do > low-level manipulation. Many of them also use the opcodes library to assemble > and disassemble machine instructions. > This port may be used as a replacement for the system binutils and support > features from the latest versions of GCC. > For cross-compilation, see the devel/cross-binutils port. > WWW: https://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/ > Mark Millard This prompted me to run "svn up" on FreeBSD ports tree. But I found no devel/cross-binutils, you had my hopes up. There is a cross/cross-binutils in (NetBSD) pkgsrc. DESCR shows The cross-binutils pkg is used only by the other `cross' pkgs. The binutils provides various binary manipulation utilities as well as the GNU linker. (The assembler is bundled with each individual cross pkg.) Tom ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:08:50 +0900,
Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote:
>
> On 2020-Jul-22, at 01:03, Mark Millard wrote:
>
> > On 2020-Jul-22, at 00:23, KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, Mark
> >>
> >> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:51:41 +0900,
> >> Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote:
> >>>
> >>> KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko kiri at truefc.org wrote on
> >>> Tue Jul 21 02:33:25 UTC 2020 :
> >>>
> checking for iconv declaration...
> extern size_t iconv (iconv_t cd, char * *inbuf, size_t
> *inbytesleft, char * *outbuf, size_t *outbytesleft);
> *** BFD does not support target native-unknown-freebsd13.0.
> *** Look in bfd/config.bfd for supported targets.
> gmake[3]: *** [Makefile:3563: configure-binutils] Error 1
> gmake[3]: Leaving directory
> '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
> gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:851: all] Error 2
> gmake[2]: Leaving directory
> '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
> ===> Compilation failed unexpectedly.
> Try to set MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes and rebuild before reporting the failure
> to
> the maintainer.
> *** Error code 1
> >>>
> >>> lang/gcc9/Makefile references binutils via:
> >>>
> >>> BUILD_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
> >>> RUN_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
> >>> . . .
> >>> USE_BINUTILS= yes
> >>>
> >>> The BUILD_DEPENDS and RUN_DEPENDS references to
> >>> binutils are to the assembler that binutils
> >>> generates and installs. So gcc9 needs to be able
> >>> to use that assembler at both gcc9 build-time and
> >>> gcc9 run-time.
> >>>
> >>> The notation leaves the FLAVOR implicit/empty and
> >>> so should lead to devel/binutils/Makefile using
> >>> its line:
> >>>
> >>> FLAVOR?=native
> >>>
> >>> to assign the "native" for its own internal logic
> >>> to use.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hmm. The "target native-unknown-freebsd13.0" looks
> >>> very odd to me. The only lines in the devel/binutils
> >>> Makefile to deal with "unknown-" text directly are:
> >>>
> >>> # grep -r unknown- /usr/ports/devel/binutils/
> >>> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET?=
> >>> ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> >>> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET=
> >>> x86_64-unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> >>>
> >>> (I'll later deal with an indirection where "_" is
> >>> replaced by "-".)
> >>>
> >>> Only the 1st line of that pair would potentially form
> >>> "native-unknown-" text.
> >>>
> >>> So looking at the context of the first line I find
> >>> (". . ." for omitted lines):
> >>>
> >>> FLAVOR?=native
> >>> . . .
> >>> .if ${FLAVOR} != native
> >>> PKGNAMEPREFIX= ${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}-
> >>> PLIST= ${PKGDIR}/pkg-plist-${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}
> >>>
> >>> .if ${PKGNAMEPREFIX:M*-*-}
> >>> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> >>> .else
> >>> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> >>> .endif
> >>>
> >>> . . .
> >>>
> >>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--disable-shared \
> >>> --target=${BUTARGET}
> >>> .endif
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> (That is also the only instance of "--target=" in the
> >>> Makefile.)
> >>>
> >>> The ${FLAVOR} != native test should mean that the code
> >>> is not used for FLAVOR being exactly "native".
> >>>
> >>> There is a separate code block for:
> >>>
> >>> .if ${FLAVOR} == native
> >>> BUREMOVE= coffdump \
> >>> dlltool \
> >>> dllwrap \
> >>> nlmconv \
> >>> srconv \
> >>> sysdump \
> >>> windmc \
> >>> windres
> >>> USES+= localbase
> >>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--with-system-zlib \
> >>> --with-gmp=${LOCALBASE} \
> >>> --with-mpfr=${LOCALBASE} \
> >>> --enable-targets=all \
> >>> --enable-threads=yes
> >>> INFO= as \
> >>> binutils \
> >>> gprof \
> >>> bfd \
> >>> ld
> >>> .endif
> >>>
> >>> But that code does not specify a specific target
> >>> (instead: "--enable-targets=all").
> >>>
> >>> There is the FLAVOR value "riscv32_unknown_elf" that
> >>> could produce target "riscv32-unknown-elf-freebsd13.0"
> >>> but that is not what was reported as involved.
> >>>
> >>> I've ignored CROSS_TOOLCHAIN infrastructure as
> >>> it was not mentioned as being in use.
> >>>
> >>> I do not see how devel/binutils/Makefile would
> >>> generate "native-unknown-freebsd13.0" text on
> >>> its own.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry I've not been able to identify anything for
> >>> the error.
> >>>
> >>> I'll note that I build ports with poudriere (-devel
> >>> variant) and have not had the problem in that
> >>> context.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I forgot to say that make target is `package-recursive'. I
> >> tried to get PKGNAME with
Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
On 2020-Jul-22, at 01:03, Mark Millard wrote:
> On 2020-Jul-22, at 00:23, KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko wrote:
>
>> Hi, Mark
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:51:41 +0900,
>> Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote:
>>>
>>> KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko kiri at truefc.org wrote on
>>> Tue Jul 21 02:33:25 UTC 2020 :
>>>
checking for iconv declaration...
extern size_t iconv (iconv_t cd, char * *inbuf, size_t
*inbytesleft, char * *outbuf, size_t *outbytesleft);
*** BFD does not support target native-unknown-freebsd13.0.
*** Look in bfd/config.bfd for supported targets.
gmake[3]: *** [Makefile:3563: configure-binutils] Error 1
gmake[3]: Leaving directory
'/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:851: all] Error 2
gmake[2]: Leaving directory
'/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
===> Compilation failed unexpectedly.
Try to set MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes and rebuild before reporting the failure to
the maintainer.
*** Error code 1
>>>
>>> lang/gcc9/Makefile references binutils via:
>>>
>>> BUILD_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
>>> RUN_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
>>> . . .
>>> USE_BINUTILS= yes
>>>
>>> The BUILD_DEPENDS and RUN_DEPENDS references to
>>> binutils are to the assembler that binutils
>>> generates and installs. So gcc9 needs to be able
>>> to use that assembler at both gcc9 build-time and
>>> gcc9 run-time.
>>>
>>> The notation leaves the FLAVOR implicit/empty and
>>> so should lead to devel/binutils/Makefile using
>>> its line:
>>>
>>> FLAVOR?=native
>>>
>>> to assign the "native" for its own internal logic
>>> to use.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm. The "target native-unknown-freebsd13.0" looks
>>> very odd to me. The only lines in the devel/binutils
>>> Makefile to deal with "unknown-" text directly are:
>>>
>>> # grep -r unknown- /usr/ports/devel/binutils/
>>> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET?=
>>> ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>>> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET=
>>> x86_64-unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>>>
>>> (I'll later deal with an indirection where "_" is
>>> replaced by "-".)
>>>
>>> Only the 1st line of that pair would potentially form
>>> "native-unknown-" text.
>>>
>>> So looking at the context of the first line I find
>>> (". . ." for omitted lines):
>>>
>>> FLAVOR?=native
>>> . . .
>>> .if ${FLAVOR} != native
>>> PKGNAMEPREFIX= ${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}-
>>> PLIST= ${PKGDIR}/pkg-plist-${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}
>>>
>>> .if ${PKGNAMEPREFIX:M*-*-}
>>> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>>> .else
>>> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>>> .endif
>>>
>>> . . .
>>>
>>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--disable-shared \
>>> --target=${BUTARGET}
>>> .endif
>>>
>>>
>>> (That is also the only instance of "--target=" in the
>>> Makefile.)
>>>
>>> The ${FLAVOR} != native test should mean that the code
>>> is not used for FLAVOR being exactly "native".
>>>
>>> There is a separate code block for:
>>>
>>> .if ${FLAVOR} == native
>>> BUREMOVE= coffdump \
>>> dlltool \
>>> dllwrap \
>>> nlmconv \
>>> srconv \
>>> sysdump \
>>> windmc \
>>> windres
>>> USES+= localbase
>>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--with-system-zlib \
>>> --with-gmp=${LOCALBASE} \
>>> --with-mpfr=${LOCALBASE} \
>>> --enable-targets=all \
>>> --enable-threads=yes
>>> INFO= as \
>>> binutils \
>>> gprof \
>>> bfd \
>>> ld
>>> .endif
>>>
>>> But that code does not specify a specific target
>>> (instead: "--enable-targets=all").
>>>
>>> There is the FLAVOR value "riscv32_unknown_elf" that
>>> could produce target "riscv32-unknown-elf-freebsd13.0"
>>> but that is not what was reported as involved.
>>>
>>> I've ignored CROSS_TOOLCHAIN infrastructure as
>>> it was not mentioned as being in use.
>>>
>>> I do not see how devel/binutils/Makefile would
>>> generate "native-unknown-freebsd13.0" text on
>>> its own.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry I've not been able to identify anything for
>>> the error.
>>>
>>> I'll note that I build ports with poudriere (-devel
>>> variant) and have not had the problem in that
>>> context.
>>>
>>
>> I forgot to say that make target is `package-recursive'. I
>> tried to get PKGNAME with package-depends:
>>
>>
>> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/lang/gcc9 # make -ki package-depends
>> gmp-6.2.0:math/gmp
>> indexinfo-0.3.1:print/indexinfo
>> mpfr-4.0.2:math/mpfr
>> mpc-1.1.0_2:math/mpc
>> native-binutils-2.33.1_2,1:devel/binutils
>> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/lang/gcc9 #
>>
>>
>> But PKGNAME in devel/binutils is:
>>
>> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/devel/binutils # make
Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
On 2020-Jul-22, at 00:23, KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko wrote:
> Hi, Mark
>
> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:51:41 +0900,
> Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote:
>>
>> KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko kiri at truefc.org wrote on
>> Tue Jul 21 02:33:25 UTC 2020 :
>>
>>> checking for iconv declaration...
>>> extern size_t iconv (iconv_t cd, char * *inbuf, size_t
>>> *inbytesleft, char * *outbuf, size_t *outbytesleft);
>>> *** BFD does not support target native-unknown-freebsd13.0.
>>> *** Look in bfd/config.bfd for supported targets.
>>> gmake[3]: *** [Makefile:3563: configure-binutils] Error 1
>>> gmake[3]: Leaving directory
>>> '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
>>> gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:851: all] Error 2
>>> gmake[2]: Leaving directory
>>> '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
>>> ===> Compilation failed unexpectedly.
>>> Try to set MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes and rebuild before reporting the failure to
>>> the maintainer.
>>> *** Error code 1
>>
>> lang/gcc9/Makefile references binutils via:
>>
>> BUILD_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
>> RUN_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
>> . . .
>> USE_BINUTILS= yes
>>
>> The BUILD_DEPENDS and RUN_DEPENDS references to
>> binutils are to the assembler that binutils
>> generates and installs. So gcc9 needs to be able
>> to use that assembler at both gcc9 build-time and
>> gcc9 run-time.
>>
>> The notation leaves the FLAVOR implicit/empty and
>> so should lead to devel/binutils/Makefile using
>> its line:
>>
>> FLAVOR?=native
>>
>> to assign the "native" for its own internal logic
>> to use.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmm. The "target native-unknown-freebsd13.0" looks
>> very odd to me. The only lines in the devel/binutils
>> Makefile to deal with "unknown-" text directly are:
>>
>> # grep -r unknown- /usr/ports/devel/binutils/
>> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET?=
>> ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET=
>> x86_64-unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>>
>> (I'll later deal with an indirection where "_" is
>> replaced by "-".)
>>
>> Only the 1st line of that pair would potentially form
>> "native-unknown-" text.
>>
>> So looking at the context of the first line I find
>> (". . ." for omitted lines):
>>
>> FLAVOR?=native
>> . . .
>> .if ${FLAVOR} != native
>> PKGNAMEPREFIX= ${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}-
>> PLIST= ${PKGDIR}/pkg-plist-${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}
>>
>> .if ${PKGNAMEPREFIX:M*-*-}
>> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>> .else
>> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>> .endif
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--disable-shared \
>>--target=${BUTARGET}
>> .endif
>>
>>
>> (That is also the only instance of "--target=" in the
>> Makefile.)
>>
>> The ${FLAVOR} != native test should mean that the code
>> is not used for FLAVOR being exactly "native".
>>
>> There is a separate code block for:
>>
>> .if ${FLAVOR} == native
>> BUREMOVE= coffdump \
>>dlltool \
>>dllwrap \
>>nlmconv \
>>srconv \
>>sysdump \
>>windmc \
>>windres
>> USES+= localbase
>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--with-system-zlib \
>>--with-gmp=${LOCALBASE} \
>>--with-mpfr=${LOCALBASE} \
>>--enable-targets=all \
>>--enable-threads=yes
>> INFO= as \
>>binutils \
>>gprof \
>>bfd \
>>ld
>> .endif
>>
>> But that code does not specify a specific target
>> (instead: "--enable-targets=all").
>>
>> There is the FLAVOR value "riscv32_unknown_elf" that
>> could produce target "riscv32-unknown-elf-freebsd13.0"
>> but that is not what was reported as involved.
>>
>> I've ignored CROSS_TOOLCHAIN infrastructure as
>> it was not mentioned as being in use.
>>
>> I do not see how devel/binutils/Makefile would
>> generate "native-unknown-freebsd13.0" text on
>> its own.
>>
>>
>> Sorry I've not been able to identify anything for
>> the error.
>>
>> I'll note that I build ports with poudriere (-devel
>> variant) and have not had the problem in that
>> context.
>>
>
> I forgot to say that make target is `package-recursive'. I
> tried to get PKGNAME with package-depends:
>
>
> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/lang/gcc9 # make -ki package-depends
> gmp-6.2.0:math/gmp
> indexinfo-0.3.1:print/indexinfo
> mpfr-4.0.2:math/mpfr
> mpc-1.1.0_2:math/mpc
> native-binutils-2.33.1_2,1:devel/binutils
> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/lang/gcc9 #
>
>
> But PKGNAME in devel/binutils is:
>
> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/devel/binutils # make -VPKGNAME
> binutils-2.33.1_2,1
> root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/devel/binutils #
>
> I don't know why it is. As far as I see
> devel/binutils/Makefile, FLAVOR default is `native' and
> PKGNAMEPREFIX
Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
Hi, Mark
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 17:51:41 +0900,
Mark Millard via freebsd-ports wrote:
>
> KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko kiri at truefc.org wrote on
> Tue Jul 21 02:33:25 UTC 2020 :
>
> > checking for iconv declaration...
> > extern size_t iconv (iconv_t cd, char * *inbuf, size_t
> > *inbytesleft, char * *outbuf, size_t *outbytesleft);
> > *** BFD does not support target native-unknown-freebsd13.0.
> > *** Look in bfd/config.bfd for supported targets.
> > gmake[3]: *** [Makefile:3563: configure-binutils] Error 1
> > gmake[3]: Leaving directory
> > '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
> > gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:851: all] Error 2
> > gmake[2]: Leaving directory
> > '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
> > ===> Compilation failed unexpectedly.
> > Try to set MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes and rebuild before reporting the failure to
> > the maintainer.
> > *** Error code 1
>
> lang/gcc9/Makefile references binutils via:
>
> BUILD_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
> RUN_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
> . . .
> USE_BINUTILS= yes
>
> The BUILD_DEPENDS and RUN_DEPENDS references to
> binutils are to the assembler that binutils
> generates and installs. So gcc9 needs to be able
> to use that assembler at both gcc9 build-time and
> gcc9 run-time.
>
> The notation leaves the FLAVOR implicit/empty and
> so should lead to devel/binutils/Makefile using
> its line:
>
> FLAVOR?=native
>
> to assign the "native" for its own internal logic
> to use.
>
>
>
> Hmm. The "target native-unknown-freebsd13.0" looks
> very odd to me. The only lines in the devel/binutils
> Makefile to deal with "unknown-" text directly are:
>
> # grep -r unknown- /usr/ports/devel/binutils/
> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET?=
> ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> /usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET=
> x86_64-unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
>
> (I'll later deal with an indirection where "_" is
> replaced by "-".)
>
> Only the 1st line of that pair would potentially form
> "native-unknown-" text.
>
> So looking at the context of the first line I find
> (". . ." for omitted lines):
>
> FLAVOR?=native
> . . .
> .if ${FLAVOR} != native
> PKGNAMEPREFIX= ${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}-
> PLIST= ${PKGDIR}/pkg-plist-${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}
>
> .if ${PKGNAMEPREFIX:M*-*-}
> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> .else
> BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
> .endif
>
> . . .
>
> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--disable-shared \
> --target=${BUTARGET}
> .endif
>
>
> (That is also the only instance of "--target=" in the
> Makefile.)
>
> The ${FLAVOR} != native test should mean that the code
> is not used for FLAVOR being exactly "native".
>
> There is a separate code block for:
>
> .if ${FLAVOR} == native
> BUREMOVE= coffdump \
> dlltool \
> dllwrap \
> nlmconv \
> srconv \
> sysdump \
> windmc \
> windres
> USES+= localbase
> CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--with-system-zlib \
> --with-gmp=${LOCALBASE} \
> --with-mpfr=${LOCALBASE} \
> --enable-targets=all \
> --enable-threads=yes
> INFO= as \
> binutils \
> gprof \
> bfd \
> ld
> .endif
>
> But that code does not specify a specific target
> (instead: "--enable-targets=all").
>
> There is the FLAVOR value "riscv32_unknown_elf" that
> could produce target "riscv32-unknown-elf-freebsd13.0"
> but that is not what was reported as involved.
>
> I've ignored CROSS_TOOLCHAIN infrastructure as
> it was not mentioned as being in use.
>
> I do not see how devel/binutils/Makefile would
> generate "native-unknown-freebsd13.0" text on
> its own.
>
>
> Sorry I've not been able to identify anything for
> the error.
>
> I'll note that I build ports with poudriere (-devel
> variant) and have not had the problem in that
> context.
>
I forgot to say that make target is `package-recursive'. I
tried to get PKGNAME with package-depends:
root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/lang/gcc9 # make -ki package-depends
gmp-6.2.0:math/gmp
indexinfo-0.3.1:print/indexinfo
mpfr-4.0.2:math/mpfr
mpc-1.1.0_2:math/mpc
native-binutils-2.33.1_2,1:devel/binutils
root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/lang/gcc9 #
But PKGNAME in devel/binutils is:
root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/devel/binutils # make -VPKGNAME
binutils-2.33.1_2,1
root@jdtpkxb:/usr/ports/devel/binutils #
I don't know why it is. As far as I see
devel/binutils/Makefile, FLAVOR default is `native' and
PKGNAMEPREFIX should be null.
What happens ?
> ===
> Mark Millard
> marklmi at yahoo.com
> ( dsl-only.net went
> away in early 2018-Mar)
>
> ___
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
>
Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko kiri at truefc.org wrote on
Tue Jul 21 02:33:25 UTC 2020 :
> checking for iconv declaration...
> extern size_t iconv (iconv_t cd, char * *inbuf, size_t *inbytesleft,
> char * *outbuf, size_t *outbytesleft);
> *** BFD does not support target native-unknown-freebsd13.0.
> *** Look in bfd/config.bfd for supported targets.
> gmake[3]: *** [Makefile:3563: configure-binutils] Error 1
> gmake[3]: Leaving directory
> '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
> gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:851: all] Error 2
> gmake[2]: Leaving directory
> '/var/ports/work/usr/ports/devel/binutils/work-native/binutils-2.33.1'
> ===> Compilation failed unexpectedly.
> Try to set MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes and rebuild before reporting the failure to
> the maintainer.
> *** Error code 1
lang/gcc9/Makefile references binutils via:
BUILD_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
RUN_DEPENDS+= ${LOCALBASE}/bin/as:devel/binutils
. . .
USE_BINUTILS= yes
The BUILD_DEPENDS and RUN_DEPENDS references to
binutils are to the assembler that binutils
generates and installs. So gcc9 needs to be able
to use that assembler at both gcc9 build-time and
gcc9 run-time.
The notation leaves the FLAVOR implicit/empty and
so should lead to devel/binutils/Makefile using
its line:
FLAVOR?=native
to assign the "native" for its own internal logic
to use.
Hmm. The "target native-unknown-freebsd13.0" looks
very odd to me. The only lines in the devel/binutils
Makefile to deal with "unknown-" text directly are:
# grep -r unknown- /usr/ports/devel/binutils/
/usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET?=
${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
/usr/ports/devel/binutils/Makefile:BUTARGET=
x86_64-unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
(I'll later deal with an indirection where "_" is
replaced by "-".)
Only the 1st line of that pair would potentially form
"native-unknown-" text.
So looking at the context of the first line I find
(". . ." for omitted lines):
FLAVOR?=native
. . .
.if ${FLAVOR} != native
PKGNAMEPREFIX= ${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}-
PLIST= ${PKGDIR}/pkg-plist-${FLAVOR:C/_/-/g}
.if ${PKGNAMEPREFIX:M*-*-}
BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
.else
BUTARGET?= ${PKGNAMEPREFIX}unknown-${OPSYS:tl}${OSREL}
.endif
. . .
CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--disable-shared \
--target=${BUTARGET}
.endif
(That is also the only instance of "--target=" in the
Makefile.)
The ${FLAVOR} != native test should mean that the code
is not used for FLAVOR being exactly "native".
There is a separate code block for:
.if ${FLAVOR} == native
BUREMOVE= coffdump \
dlltool \
dllwrap \
nlmconv \
srconv \
sysdump \
windmc \
windres
USES+= localbase
CONFIGURE_ARGS+=--with-system-zlib \
--with-gmp=${LOCALBASE} \
--with-mpfr=${LOCALBASE} \
--enable-targets=all \
--enable-threads=yes
INFO= as \
binutils \
gprof \
bfd \
ld
.endif
But that code does not specify a specific target
(instead: "--enable-targets=all").
There is the FLAVOR value "riscv32_unknown_elf" that
could produce target "riscv32-unknown-elf-freebsd13.0"
but that is not what was reported as involved.
I've ignored CROSS_TOOLCHAIN infrastructure as
it was not mentioned as being in use.
I do not see how devel/binutils/Makefile would
generate "native-unknown-freebsd13.0" text on
its own.
Sorry I've not been able to identify anything for
the error.
I'll note that I build ports with poudriere (-devel
variant) and have not had the problem in that
context.
===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
( dsl-only.net went
away in early 2018-Mar)
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why lang/gcc9 depends native-binutils ?
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:33:13AM +0900, KIRIYAMA Kazuhiko wrote: > > lang/gcc9 depends devel/binutils with FLAVOR=native, so gcc9 > compilation stopped at devel/binutils. Why lang/gcc9 depends > native-binutils ? > Just a guess. LTO. -- Steve ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
