Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 23560 - Trying to install gpc with the beta portage.
Summary: Trying to install gpc with the beta portage.
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 48377
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Development (show other bugs)
Hardware: x86 Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: George Shapovalov (RETIRED)
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-06-26 21:36 UTC by Pieter De Wit
Modified: 2005-07-17 13:06 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Pieter De Wit 2003-06-26 21:36:06 UTC
I am trying to install gpc using the beta portage. The problem is that gcc-3.2.3
is on the portage and gpc only installs with up to 3.2.2. The ebuild file of gpc
says >=gcc.something. Is there a way we can either fix this or stop the emerge
saying 3.2.3 is not yet supported by gpc ? I just noted that gcc-3.2.2 is also
downloaded.

# emerge gpc
Calculating dependencies ...done!
>>> emerge (1 of 1) dev-lang/gpc-20030209 to /
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) gpc-20030209.tar.gz
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) gcc-3.2.2.tar.bz2
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking gpc-20030209.tar.gz to /var/tmp/portage/gpc-20030209/work
>>> Unpacking gcc-3.2.3.tar.bz2 to /var/tmp/portage/gpc-20030209/work

Huh ?

***
*** Detected GCC version 3.2.3.
*** The GPC port for GCC 3.x is still in an early state.
*** You can proceed now if you want to help testing it.
***
*** For a "production compiler" we currently still
*** recommend GPC based on gcc-2.8.1 or 2.95.x.
***
*** Press ENTER to continue, Ctrl-C to abort.
***

***
*** Detected GCC version 3.2.3.
*** GPC 2.1 requires one of the following versions of the GCC sources to build:
***
***   2.8.1
***   2.95.1
***   2.95.2
***   2.95.3-5
***   2.95.3-6
***   2.95.3-8
***   2.95.3
***   2.95.4
***   2.95
***   3.2.1
***   3.2.2
***
*** (You can try to patch GCC manually by typing a command like
*** `patch -p1 < p/diffs/gcc-<version>.diff' and patching possible
*** rejects by hand before you run configure again.)
***

Configure in /var/tmp/portage/gpc-20030209/work/gcc-3.2.3/gcc failed, exiting.

!!! ERROR: dev-lang/gpc-20030209 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 93, Exitcode 1
!!! (no error message)


Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.Install GPC
2.
3.

Actual Results:  
Error displayed - see in details
Comment 1 George Shapovalov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-08-24 17:23:19 UTC
Well, thats a tough situation - the ebuild, the way it is now, has some flexibility to allow various versions of gcc to build against, although only up to  certain version. As a quick fix try copying gpc-20030209.ebuild to gpc-20030507.ebuild. That's the latest alpha of gpc available and I seem to remember it supporting gcc-3.2.3. 

The way it is done now, gpc ebuild tries to use the active gcc version to bootstrap off. However this requires dynamic assignment of SRC_URI, which is a no-no as of lately (the original version of gpc ebuild was created way before portage even had db caching). 

This means that I will need to rewrite the ebuild some time soon. I guess the only option is to hardware some oldish (the most supported by gpc "team") version of gcc and build against it. Now, that we can have multiple gcc versions installed, it should be possible. It might be also possible to try keep bootstrap the way it is, but this would require manual creation of digests and Manifest, so that digests contain md5's for *all possible* gcc versions - quite tedious task. I think I'll just stick with previous idea :).

Anyway, for now try that renaming "fix" and let me know if that worked. I'll try to get at rewriting gpc ebuild soon.

Will keep this bug open meanwhile, as a remainder.

George
Comment 2 Robin Johnson archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2003-10-01 18:47:50 UTC
I tried to make a start on it with gpc-20030830-minimal and gcc-3.3.1
but I ran accross major difficulties, and found this on the mailing list:
http://www.gnu-pascal.de/crystal/gpc/en/mail9364.html

Basically all of gcc-3.3 is out for the moment with GPC :-(.

*Goes back to fpc and boch's turbo pascal 7*
Comment 3 slyzer 2003-10-29 09:49:48 UTC
Hi,

try the latest alpha of gpc: 20030830. It will work with gcc <= 3.3.1.

cu
 slyzer
Comment 4 Jeremy Huddleston (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-02-09 02:21:03 UTC
And on top of this, gpc is misdetecting my installed version of gcc for some reason...

$ emerge -v gpc
Calculating dependencies ...done!
>>> emerge (1 of 1) dev-lang/gpc-20030209 to /
>>> md5 src_uri ;-) gpc-20030209.tar.gz

!!! No message digest entry found for file "gcc-3.2.3.tar.bz2."
!!! Most likely a temporary problem. Try 'emerge sync' again later.
!!! If you are certain of the authenticity of the file then you may type
!!! the following to generate a new digest:
!!!   ebuild /usr/portage/category/package/package-version.ebuild digest

$ gcc -dumpversion
3.3.2

-----------------
notice my gcc version and the version the ebuild wants differ... but the ebuild is getting it theough gcc -dumpversion

Changing:
GCC_PV=$(gcc -dumpversion)
to:
GCC_PV=`gcc -dumpversion`
-----------------

$ ebuild gpc-20030209.ebuild digest
>>> Generating digest file...
<<< gpc-20030209.tar.gz
<<< gcc-3.3.2.tar.bz2
>>> Generating manifest file...
<<< gpc-20030209.ebuild
<<< ChangeLog
<<< gpc-2.1.ebuild
<<< files/digest-gpc-20030209
<<< files/gpc-20020510_lang.h.patch
<<< files/digest-gpc-2.1
>>> Computed message digests.

-----------------------
Notice that now it correctly wants gcc-3.3.2.  I have no idea why this should change anything... aren't $() and `` the same?
Comment 5 George Shapovalov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-06-11 18:18:03 UTC
Ok, looks like I finally was able to seriously look at gpc again (app-sci stuff is tearing me apart :)). Fortunately new beta was recently released, very timely I must say, and it has patches for gcc up to 3.3.3. Looks like there is yet hope..

In any case I am closing this bug as a dup of #48377, through which I'll be tracking progress of my attempts to resurrect this package.

George

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 48377 ***