Jason Bacon <bacon4000%gmail.com@localhost> writes: >> 4. Can someone provide a specific example of how the >> PKGSRC_GCC_BOOTSTRAP=yes might cause a problem? I think building >> dependencies with the system compiler and linking against them with >> a newer pkgsrc compiler should be fine in almost all cases, and a >> recursive PKGSRC_GCC_BOOTSTRAP variable should ensure consistency in >> gcc and dependency builds (unless I'm overlooking something). > Correction: Tagging packages individually would ensure consistent > builds, not the recursive PKGSRC_GCC_BOOTSTRAP variable. My thoughts > got jumbled here. For example, with the recursive variable, bzip2 > could be built with the system compiler or pkgsrc compiler depending > on what build depends on it. Tagging bzip2 explicitly would ensure > that it's always built with the system compiler, if I'm understanding > the proposal correctly. On NetBSD, the dependencies are fairly small, so the explicit marking seems fine. If you want to volunteer to maintain the list for Linux and manage the complexity resulting from PREFER_PKGSRC I am happy to adopt explicit marking as the standard approach.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature