Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: seth AT swoolley.homeip.net
  • To: Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: sm-discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc
  • Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 23:41:44 -0800

Source Mage doesn't have a "build order", it has dependencies. You can
force order with triggers, however. You might be correct that there's
an obvious problem, but that doesn't mean your answer shouldn't be
explained. Fermat's Last Theorem was an obvious problem, but the proof
wasn't.

You should explain why this is the answer and for each spell
what action would need to take place for a version bump of any.

Furthermore, I believe your build order is (perhaps) correct for the
case where all versions change. Where only one version changes, I don't
think your order is minimally correct. SMGL strives for minimalistic
solutions when available.

Lastly, why is your order below the only way? What if we build binutils
after gcc (static)? Why build gcc statically? Why is a rebuild of the
toolchain (in any order) insufficient before a rebuild?

We never tell people that a rebuild will go back and rebuild stuff that
could get new features from a later built version update. If you want
that, you can do a rebuild twice and be pretty sure things worked
(although, you can force a case where this is not the case if you wanted
to, so technically a rebuild until builds stopped changing (which may
never happen) is the only real way to be sure).

Since you haven't given any references, I'm unlikely to agree with your
suggestion, given what I know already. That may change with references
and explanation, though.

Seth

On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 12:52:00AM -0300, Ismael Luceno wrote:
> I got to the conclusion that the current build order for binutils, gcc,
> and glibc, is wrong in the case where you want to rebuild the system
> with a different version of either of these.
>
> I will not explain the problem, because it's somewhat obvious, and
> very long to explain in deep.
>
> The correct build order is:
> 1) Linux headers
> 2) binutils
> 4) gcc (static)
> 5) glibc
> 6) gcc
> 7) binutils
>
> I'm new to SourceMage (a few days), so I'm not sure if that can be
> achieved automatically with sorcery, but surely easy to implement.
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page