Bug 619542 – sys-devel/gcc-4.7.3-r1 does not compile with gcc 5.4.0: ‘gnu_inline’ attribute present on ‘libc_name_p’

• Product: Gentoo/Alt
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description Constantin Runge 2017-05-24 12:09:36 UTC]

<=gcc-4.7 is not buildable with >=gcc-5.0 due to a mismatch gperf headers. This means, that bootstrapping on a host system with a gcc more recent than 5.0, stage2 (or stage3 when bootstrapping from an existing gentoo system) will fail while emerging gcc.

[Comment 1 Constantin Runge 2017-05-24 12:11:49 UTC]

There seems to be a patch for this [1], which apparently is not merged yet [2] if I interpret the State field set to new correctly.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00375.html
[2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/504982/

[Comment 2 Willem Mulder 2017-07-06 14:59:29 UTC]

I just ran into this issue as well. I also noticed <sys-devel/gcc-4.9 has been hardmasked since 21 May...

[Comment 3 Willem Mulder 2017-07-06 15:29:00 UTC]

It seems the bootstrapper is set to install gcc <4.8, because gcc 4.8+ requires a C++ compiler. Perhaps it's better to check for an installed C++ compiler.

[Comment 4 Michael Haubenwallner (RETIRED) 2017-07-18 08:45:07 UTC]

bootstrap-prefix.sh now checks for host gcc greater than 4.7 to avoid bootstrapping <gcc-4.8:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/proj/prefix.git/commit/?id=0400d5c9f6345a3e92b54f9591ca5210bcfe2646

Thanks!

[Comment 5 Michael Haubenwallner (RETIRED) 2017-07-18 08:48:15 UTC]

*** Bug 588092 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Comment 6 Benda Xu 2017-07-18 17:01:25 UTC]

>gcc-4.7, as anything newer provides c++ anyway.

Is that really so?  In my distributions, it is possible to uninstall c++.

[Comment 7 Michael Haubenwallner (RETIRED) 2017-08-23 11:08:42 UTC]

(In reply to Benda Xu from comment #6)
> >gcc-4.7, as anything newer provides c++ anyway.
> 
> Is that really so?  In my distributions, it is possible to uninstall c++.

Agreed, but how could we work around this situation?

I can think of detecting and yelling here, but probably >=gcc-4.8 does this itself already, no?

[Comment 8 Benda Xu 2017-08-24 01:56:58 UTC]

(In reply to Michael Haubenwallner from comment #7)
> (In reply to Benda Xu from comment #6)
> > >gcc-4.7, as anything newer provides c++ anyway.
> > 
> > Is that really so?  In my distributions, it is possible to uninstall c++.
> 
> Agreed, but how could we work around this situation?
> 
> I can think of detecting and yelling here, but probably >=gcc-4.8 does this
> itself already, no?

Not sure. Does the ebuild yell or the gcc build system yell?

I do think it is time to move forward and require c++ to bootstrap Prefix, and probably providing an independent way to bootstrap c++ from c, like what we did for bash bootstrap.