[gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 407 bytes --]

Hey all,

I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
to build [1].

I see that gcc-6.3 doesn't have keywords, so I'm
wondering when it will get them? Does anyone have any idea? I'm not
talking about stable keywords, just ~. ;-)

Thanks much,

William

[1] https://www.cockroachlabs.com/docs/install-cockroachdb.html

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Hanno Böck]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 561 bytes --]

On Wed, 3 May 2017 11:43:11 -0500
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I see that gcc-6.3 doesn't have keywords, so I'm
> wondering when it will get them? Does anyone have any idea? I'm not
> talking about stable keywords, just ~. ;-)

Given that gcc 7.1 was just released and gcc 6 isn't even keyworded yet
I'm wondering if it'd be an idea to right away strive for gcc 7 and
skip keywording+stabilizing gcc 6.x in gentoo.

-- 
Hanno Böck
https://hboeck.de/

mail/jabber: hanno@hboeck.de
GPG: FE73757FA60E4E21B937579FA5880072BBB51E42

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Luca Barbato]

On 5/3/17 6:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
> packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
> to build [1].
> 
> I see that gcc-6.3 doesn't have keywords, so I'm
> wondering when it will get them? Does anyone have any idea? I'm not
> talking about stable keywords, just ~. ;-)
> 
> Thanks much,
> 
> William
> 
> [1] https://www.cockroachlabs.com/docs/install-cockroachdb.html
> 

As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.

So, I'm not seeing anything wrong in ~ gcc-6.

lu

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Ian Stakenvicius]

On 03/05/17 01:58 PM, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 5/3/17 6:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
>> packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
>> to build [1].
> 
> As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
> software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
> from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.

Just a heads-up, that p.mask list would happen to include firefox and 
thunderbird right now.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 846 bytes --]

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 02:00:26PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 03/05/17 01:58 PM, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > On 5/3/17 6:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> Hey all,
> >>
> >> I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
> >> packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
> >> to build [1].
> > 
> > As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
> > software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
> > from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.
> 
> Just a heads-up, that p.mask list would happen to include firefox and 
> thunderbird right now.
 
 So if we don't p.mask those, is them breaking with gcc-6 still enough
 to keep gcc-6 out of ~? If not, I definitely +1 what lu_zero said,
 let's add ~keywords to gcc-6.

 William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Ian Stakenvicius]

On 03/05/17 02:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 02:00:26PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> On 03/05/17 01:58 PM, Luca Barbato wrote:
>>> On 5/3/17 6:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>> Hey all,
>>>>
>>>> I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
>>>> packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
>>>> to build [1].
>>>
>>> As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
>>> software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
>>> from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.
>>
>> Just a heads-up, that p.mask list would happen to include firefox and
>> thunderbird right now.
>   
>   So if we don't p.mask those, is them breaking with gcc-6 still enough
>   to keep gcc-6 out of ~? If not, I definitely +1 what lu_zero said,
>   let's add ~keywords to gcc-6.
> 
>   William
> 

No, i'm good with keywording gcc-6 still.  I'm just not Ok with 
firefox and tbird and others being p.masked for removal simply because 
they don't build.

Also its worth noting that the gcc-6.3 build failure is apparently not 
absolute, there are people that have built mozilla stuff fine with 6.3

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Erik Närström]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 698 bytes --]

? Firefox compiles for me, i am unstable amd64.

/ekg

On 3 May 2017 20:02, "Ian Stakenvicius" <axs@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 03/05/17 01:58 PM, Luca Barbato wrote:
>
>> On 5/3/17 6:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>> I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
>>> packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
>>> to build [1].
>>>
>>
>> As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
>> software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
>> from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.
>>
>
> Just a heads-up, that p.mask list would happen to include firefox and
> thunderbird right now.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1282 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[grozin]

On Wed, 3 May 2017, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 03/05/17 01:58 PM, Luca Barbato wrote:
>>  As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
>>  software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
>>  from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.
> Just a heads-up, that p.mask list would happen to include firefox and 
> thunderbird right now.
And pdftk. It needs gcj, and has no usable alternatives.

What should I keep in my system to continue to use (and maybe recompile) 
pdftk?

Andrey

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Erik Närström]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 675 bytes --]

Portage pulls in gcc-5.4 when i run 'emerge -p pdftk'.

/ekg

On 4 May 2017 09:29, <grozin@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 May 2017, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
>> On 03/05/17 01:58 PM, Luca Barbato wrote:
>>
>>>  As I said few times, we should dump gcc-5 sooner than later and any
>>>  software that does not build with gcc-6 should be p.masked and dropped
>>>  from the tree if there isn't a nice fix for it.
>>>
>> Just a heads-up, that p.mask list would happen to include firefox and
>> thunderbird right now.
>>
> And pdftk. It needs gcj, and has no usable alternatives.
>
> What should I keep in my system to continue to use (and maybe recompile)
> pdftk?
>
> Andrey
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1258 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 703 bytes --]

> 
> I see that gcc-6.3 doesn't have keywords, so I'm
> wondering when it will get them? Does anyone have any idea? I'm not
> talking about stable keywords, just ~. ;-)
> 

Just as a datapoint, my main dev system is ~80% stable and has been updating 
with gcc-6 since beginning of february; no problems. [*] [**]

Without looking at the blockers I'd be fine with ~arch gcc-6.3 asap (so we can 
eventually get gcc-7 in masked).

[*] Well I had to fix a sci-* package I'm mantaining myself, but I'm likely the 
only user of it, so...

[**] That include "no problems when building firefox".

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Matthias Maier]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 307 bytes --]


> Just as a datapoint, my main dev system is ~80% stable and has been updating 
> with gcc-6 since beginning of february; no problems. [*] [**]

Same here. The gcc-6 incompatibilities were resolved quite a while
ago. Let's keyword gcc-6 and try to get gcc-7 into the tree on time.

Best,
Matthias

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 850 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Thomas Deutschmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 148 bytes --]

On 2017-05-03 21:25, Matthias Maier wrote:
> Let's keyword gcc-6 and try to get gcc-7 into the tree on time.

+1


-- 
Regards,
Thomas



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 951 bytes --]

Getting gcc-6 keyworded (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry)

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 719 bytes --]

OK since 

a) nobody from toolchain responds here, 
b) a lot of people are in favour of doing this, but 
c) noone wants to do it himself, and 
d) I dont have the time to do all the research I deem necessary to do it 
myself, 

let's harness the power of the developer community. 

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Toolchain/GCC-6_keywording

Go here^, look at one blocker bug, decide why it shouldn't block keywording 
gcc-6, and comment in the list, ending your comment with ~~~~. In the end 
hopefully all the entries should look like

* bug 12345: Occurs only with -funroll-loops. User:Dilfridge

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: Getting gcc-6 keyworded (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry)

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 371 bytes --]

Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017, 23:32:19 CEST schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> OK since
> 
> a) nobody from toolchain responds here,
> b) a lot of people are in favour of doing this, but
> c) noone wants to do it himself, and

Forget this. William already did it. YAY!!!

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 568 bytes --]

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 11:43:11AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> I am asking about this because I have been asked to look into
> packaging software that has a specific requirement for >=gcc-6 in order
> to build [1].
> 
> I see that gcc-6.3 doesn't have keywords, so I'm
> wondering when it will get them? Does anyone have any idea? I'm not
> talking about stable keywords, just ~. ;-)

After the discussion on this thread (no one seemed to object), I went
ahead just now and added ~ keywords to sys-devel/gcc-6.3.0.

Thanks,

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-6.x status inquiry

[Matthias Maier]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 225 bytes --]

> After the discussion on this thread (no one seemed to object), I went
> ahead just now and added ~ keywords to sys-devel/gcc-6.3.0.

Thanks a lot!

Did you update any keywording bug (if one is open at all)?

Best,
Matthias

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 850 bytes --]