Package Base Details: gcc-git

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/gcc-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Submitter: Allan
Maintainer: fisch02
Last Packager: fisch02
Votes: 13
Popularity: 0.058181
First Submitted: 2013-06-26 03:43
Last Updated: 2020-07-14 16:59

Pinned Comments

jamespharvey20 commented on 2019-10-13 02:28

Temporarily hold to commit fcab78b9 (2019-10-01 18:21:31.) Otherwise, fails to build. There are several breaking commits after this, involving packaging failures on ada and a bootstrap failure when comparing stages 2 and 3.

jamespharvey20 commented on 2017-02-15 04:30

*** STICKY ***

These gcc*-git packages replace core's gcc* (non-git) packages. Technically, replacing the system gcc-libs can be dangerous. The possibility of a new upstream gcc git commit breaking your system isn't zero. When you compile and install this, you're using the latest git source, so you may be the first Arch user to be using that particular commit.

In practice, I haven't seen an Arch user report such a problem for many years. Just understand that if installing these packages causes your computer to eat you, don't have your loved ones blame me. Oh, and know that if things go wrong, all you *should* have to do is uninstall the git version and go back to a previously working git version or even the core version. You might be able to do this while your system is still running, or you might have to do something like boot off an Arch ISO CD.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last »

jamespharvey20 commented on 2015-12-13 20:52

Think this is where it came from:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/config-patches/2015-06/msg00017.html

^^^ "This is a minimally invasive change"

http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/config.git/commit/?id=ca9bfb8cc75a2be1819d89c664a867785c96c9ba

Then brought downstream into GCC:

https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=c14bac81551d6769741c2b1cc55e04d94fe8d3a7

Allan commented on 2015-12-13 10:48

Thanks - I'll look into why this has changed. Changing the CHOST like that is a bad idea (TM), so I'll figure out why this has occurred.

jamespharvey20 commented on 2015-12-13 10:45

Sure. The first instance I ran into it was at PKGBUILD::build(), at "make -C $CHOST/libstdc++-v3/doc doc-man-doxygen". It failed, expecting there to be a "${srcdir}/gcc-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/doc" directory. But, instead, "${srcdir}/gcc-build/" has:
build-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/
prev-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/
stage1-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/

So, it doesn't actually detect CHOST using "unknown" and give an error. It makes the directories (at least on my system) with "pc" rather than "unknown", so every instance PKGBUILD uses $CHOST points to a non-existant directory.

Off to bed. 6am here.

Allan commented on 2015-12-13 10:20

Can you point me at where GCC now expects the vendor to be set to something other than "unknown"?

jamespharvey20 commented on 2015-12-13 09:44

NOTE: GCC previously expected to see CHOST declaring vendor to be "unknown" on my system. (i.e. CHOST='x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu'.) On my system, GCC is now expecting to see vendor "pc". (i.e. CHOST='x86_64-pc-linux-gnu'.) Added a workaround so if Arch declares CHOST to be 'x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu' or 'i686-unknown-linux-gnu', it changes the 'unknown' portion to 'pc'.

If this workaround fails on your system, you will receive a compilation error due to a non-existant directory. If this happens, you may have to change the PKGBUILD so _CHOST declares vendor as "softfloat", "hardfloat", or "unknown". (The directory it complains is missing will tell you what vendor value it's expecting.)

jamespharvey20 commented on 2015-12-13 09:38

My apologies. Unexpected multiple severe family health issues. (All turned out well.) Just pushed multiple updates that should take care of everything. There are one or two namcap errors that should be fairly non-consequential documented in the PKGBUILD that I'm going to look into and take care of tomorrow.

thatbrod commented on 2015-12-01 11:56

Could the owner please either orphan or update the package?

polymer commented on 2015-10-20 13:29

Current version fails when applying patches in prepare(), after commenting these I believe the script tries to use a MakeFile that doesn't exist. I think the PKGBUILD script is buggy or old.

charlie5 commented on 2015-07-25 12:42

Ok, no worries.

I wasn't sure if it was the best way of doing things. I'll stay with the existing gnat_util pkg.

Cheers.

jamespharvey20 commented on 2015-07-25 03:24

Ahh, OK. I made my previous comments thinking it was part of gcc's svn tree. Yeah, it's definitely good to keep it a separate as an Arch package.