| Message ID | rnS1pu4_DHD_IOqgX3DNBHPRyPiBzy6LCTsgOcvZaT4Nkk8N1UfyHAteBHrA5ABj5ZR1K_VzBQy7wL6XAOoQEh27GD8PF37fvjDeD3do9eI=@carldong.me |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#37924] gnu: Fix make-gcc-libc | expand |
Hi, Carl Dong <contact@carldong.me> skribis: > * gnu/ci.scm (%core-packages): Add 'glibc-2.28', a toolchain with > default 'gcc', and a toolchain targeting 'glibc-2.28'. The problem is ‘%core-packages’ is only built when we explicitly choose the “core” subset in CI (which we do only when experimenting with ‘core-updates’ early on); in other cases, all the public packages get built and ‘%core-packages’ does not matter. Would it be an option to have: (define-public gcc/glibc-2.28 (make-gcc-libc gcc glibc-2.28)) in (gnu packages base), or does that create circular dependency issues (I don’t think so, but better be safe)? If we did that, that package would automatically picked up in CI. Thanks, Ludo’.
diff --git a/gnu/ci.scm b/gnu/ci.scm index 5d5a826647..74df3c34ab 100644 --- a/gnu/ci.scm +++ b/gnu/ci.scm @@ -110,9 +110,11 @@ SYSTEM." ;; Note: Don't put the '-final' package variants because (1) that's ;; implicit, and (2) they cannot be cross-built (due to the explicit input ;; chain.) - (list gcc-4.8 gcc-4.9 gcc-5 glibc binutils + (list gcc-4.8 gcc-4.9 gcc-5 glibc glibc-2.28 binutils gmp mpfr mpc coreutils findutils diffutils patch sed grep gawk gnu-gettext hello guile-2.0 guile-2.2 zlib gzip xz + (make-gcc-toolchain gcc) + (make-gcc-toolchain gcc glibc-2.28) %bootstrap-binaries-tarball %binutils-bootstrap-tarball (%glibc-bootstrap-tarball)