spanky uses git repo now, so we should fork it to maintain our prefix patches and make gcc-config-1.7.1 functional (and more easily maintainable)
Imported all "history" (by hand). 1.7.2 needs lots of work/testing, since it will not create links in /lib any more if /usr/lib and /lib are the same fs (usr-merge)
send me patches ;P
Finally completed the process for 1.8. Using jumbo patch http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/alt/browser/trunk/prefix-overlay/sys-devel/gcc-config/files/gcc-config-prefix-1.8-r221.patch @SpanKY: how would you like the patches? Send them to you? Attach to this bug?
I saw a lot of patches coming through and being accepted. So how close are we to the merge?
I still need to do one, regarding running tests in/for Prefix. Unfortunately I'm currently very busy with other things :(
Created attachment 434840 [details, diff] gcc-config-1.8-prefix.patch The HG URL is outdated. Please review this patch. Thanks!
Created attachment 434842 [details, diff] gcc-config-1.8.ebuild.patch The ebuild patch. Please review.
I realized that https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git has all the logic to support EPREFIX. What is holding us off from making a new release?
This seems to be done already, right? Right now a stable request is needed instead...
(In reply to Dainius Masiliūnas from comment #9) > This seems to be done already, right? > Right now a stable request is needed instead... I don't think so, the gcc-config in tree is an old release, not including the Prefix-related commits in gcc-config.git master. @Mike, could please make tag and bump a new gcc-config release? https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/log/
*** Bug 629336 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Hi toolchain team, The gcc-config git repo has its support for Prefix implemented. Could you please tag a new release of gcc-config and bump it so that we can remove our overlaid version? Thank you very much!
(In reply to Benda Xu from comment #12) > Hi toolchain team, > > The gcc-config git repo has its support for Prefix implemented. Could you > please tag a new release of gcc-config and bump it so that we can remove our > overlaid version? > > Thank you very much! I've tagged git master as 1.9.0 and bumped it - but without keywords so far. I have never touched this package before, so please test carefully and report back.
(In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #13) > I've tagged git master as 1.9.0 and bumped it Did you forget to push the tag? There is no 1.9.0 tag visible on https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/ (There is no 1.8 tag either).
(In reply to Nick Bowler from comment #14) > (In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #13) > > I've tagged git master as 1.9.0 and bumped it > > Did you forget to push the tag? There is no 1.9.0 tag visible on > > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/ > > (There is no 1.8 tag either). I'll happily push the tag as soon as I can do that. Right now this is blocked by infra handling bug 629530 ... (And I guess since the person who released 1.8 couldnt push tags either that explains the other missing tag.)
(In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #15) > (In reply to Nick Bowler from comment #14) > > (In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #13) > > > I've tagged git master as 1.9.0 and bumped it > > > > Did you forget to push the tag? There is no 1.9.0 tag visible on > > > > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/ > > > > (There is no 1.8 tag either). > > I'll happily push the tag as soon as I can do that. Right now this is > blocked by infra handling bug 629530 ... > > (And I guess since the person who released 1.8 couldnt push tags either that > explains the other missing tag.) Tag pushed.
Hey there, so has anyone tested 1.9.0, and is it working fine? Please give me feedback here, then I restore the keywords... Cheers!
(In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #17) > Hey there, > > so has anyone tested 1.9.0, and is it working fine? Please give me feedback > here, then I restore the keywords... > > Cheers! Anyone?
(In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #18) > (In reply to Andreas K. Hüttel from comment #17) > > Hey there, > > > > so has anyone tested 1.9.0, and is it working fine? Please give me feedback > > here, then I restore the keywords... > > > > Cheers! > > Anyone? Sorry for the delay. Works fine for me both in normal Gentoo and on prefix.
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=30bb0c920116826ba5b9e8c2d9548b7c39798053 commit 30bb0c920116826ba5b9e8c2d9548b7c39798053 Author: Andreas K. Hüttel <dilfridge@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2017-10-04 12:08:41 +0000 Commit: Andreas K. Hüttel <dilfridge@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2017-10-04 12:08:41 +0000 sys-devel/gcc-config: Restore keywords, based on testing by amadio, bug 417647 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/417647 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.11, Repoman-2.3.3 sys-devel/gcc-config/gcc-config-1.9.0.ebuild | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
