[llvm-dev] unable to compile llvm with gcc 4.7.4

[Bruce Hoult via llvm-dev]

I think this 3 stage bootstrap is just a fact of modern life, and progress
of languages. In fact I think you're getting away lightly, and I'm amazed
you could use only a 2-stage bootstrap from a very simple C compiler until
now!!

The good news: it should be a very very long time before you need a 4 stage
bootstrap :-)


On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Sylvain Bertrand via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The problem is modern c++. I can have a reasonable system boostrape-ed
> with (tinycc/alternative C compiler), but only in the gcc world since
> a modern c++ compiler is only bootsrape-able from near any C compiler
> there. clang and llvm are unable to do it. That why I would need to
> get 2 gccs: "any C compiler" -> gcc 4.7.4 -> gcc recent_version ->
> llvm.
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> wrote:
> > On 13 October 2016 at 12:56,  <sylvain.bertrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> It's my custom distro. My goal is to make it boostrap-able with tinycc
> (or any
> >> little C compiler alternative) as a one-man reasonable job. With the
> removal of
> >> gcc 4.7 support now official, I would need to have a 3 step bootstrap,
> adding a
> >> modern gcc (which is guaranted to compile with iso c++98-ish gcc 4.7.4,
> feature
> >> that clang cannot guaranted anymore).
> >
> > Hi Sylvain,
> >
> > I have to say, after a while thinking about your use case, I cannot
> > come up with a better solution than a 3-stage build. :(
> >
> > Maybe you need to step back a bit and ask yourself: what would be the
> > system changes to adopt GCC 4.8 natively instead of tinycc.
> >
> > What distributions do is to compile the base GCC they'll use first,
> > making sure all the correct libraries in all the correct versions are
> > bundles in the right places, then use that toolchain for *everything*.
> >
> > You seem comfortable enough building GCC 4.7, I assume as a side
> > package, like BSD ports. I'm also assuming you already need GCC (for
> > packages other than LLVM), then why not make GCC your system compiler?
> >
> > The dependencies will already be there anyway, and I don't think GCC
> > 4.8's libraries are much bigger than 4.7, so it does seem like an
> > overall gain.
> >
> > Of course, it'll mean you'll have to test your packages with GCC 4.8,
> > but assuming they already use tinycc or GCC 4.7, I hope you'll have
> > very little additional problems.
> >
> > Would any of that help?
> >
> > cheers,
> > --renato
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161017/a61490a6/attachment.html>