tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Remove USE_GCC_RUNTIME?



On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 08:18:07AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Do you mean
> 
>   If the user has set USE_PKGSRC_GCC_RUNTIME, and if the chosen compiler
>   is gcc, then always add a pkgsrc dependency on the gccN-libs package
>   corresponding to the gccN being used, and
>
>   Remove the code and docs for this (except that the main part is
>   hoisted above to non-conditional).
> 
>   Remove this declaration from all packges.
>

Yes.

> Or is this about forcing packges to link with pkgsrc's libstdc++ instead
> of native, by putting it in buildlink?
>

No.

> Does it make any sense for someone to want to use pkgsrc gcc (always) by
> seting USE_PKGSRC_GCC, but to use the native gcc libs?  Might it make
> sense for C, and not make sense for C++?  (If so, is that case
> sufficiently odd to be not supported?)
> 
> How does this interact with use of pkgsrc gcc due to GCC_REQD or
> USE_*_FEATURES?  Or is it only about the USE_PKGSRC_GCC?

USE_PKGSRC_GCC_RUNTIME is set automatically when GCC_REQD is
higher than the available GCC version on NetBSD at the moment.
This is NetBSD exclusive and done by the infrastructure.

USE_GCC_RUNTIME is supposed to be set by packages. Packages
that don't set it but use USE_PKGSRC_GCC_RUNTIME might be broken
because they don't pull in the  requeired dependency.

> Why is this about libtool?  What is it doing, that the other build
> systems don't?  Is libtool, or the rest, buggy?  Or is it that when a
> package is declared to use libtool this dependency processing happens?
> 
> Practically, what will change in built packages, under what
> circumstances?  I think you are suggesting that pretty much every
> package that uses C++ should have defined USE_GCC_RUNTIME, unless it
> somehow used libtool which did this implicitly, but I don't see how that
> added a dependency.   But it is hard to tell.

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand what libtool is doing that makes
it unnecessary either... Perhaps the way libstdc++ is resolved
is different when using libtool archives?

My intention is that any package built using a gcc from pkgsrc
should have an explicit dependency on the corresponding gccX-libs.


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index