[Bug build/25799] New: python dependency (as strict requirement)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug build/25799] New: python dependency (as strict requirement)

Sourceware - glibc-bugs mailing list
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25799

            Bug ID: 25799
           Summary: python dependency (as strict requirement)
           Product: glibc
           Version: unspecified
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: build
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: serg.brester at sebres dot de
                CC: carlos at redhat dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Starting from
[c6982f7efc1c70fe2d6160a87ee44d871ac85ab0] it is impossible to build glibc
without python (configure would fail, as well as it is added to strict
requirements now), where previously it was only needed to build some manual and
to run some tests.

But python itself needs glibc (to build or start).

This looks like a cyclic dependency, so for example it is interesting whether
it is ever possible now to compile that from scratch.

Commit-link:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=c6982f7efc1c70fe2d6160a87ee44d871ac85ab0;hp=5c81be53407434ce22b849722a3d691295480016

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug build/25799] python dependency (as strict requirement)

Sourceware - glibc-bugs mailing list
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25799

--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
Python is needed on the build system, *not* the host for which glibc is
built.  When bootstrapping for a new target, you already have native
Python on the build system, then build a cross compiler and glibc for the
new system, and can then use the cross compiler (or a newly built native
compiler) to build a native Python for the new target.  This is not a bug.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug build/25799] python dependency (as strict requirement)

Sourceware - glibc-bugs mailing list
In reply to this post by Sourceware - glibc-bugs mailing list
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25799

--- Comment #2 from Sergey Brester (aka sebres) <serg.brester at sebres dot de> ---
> When bootstrapping for a new target, you already have native Python on the build system

Unless you don't have native python on build system (or even a host system with
gnu toolchain at all). I did not mean a cross-compiling in my question.
You seem to strange understand the sentence "compile from scratch".

Assume you have ONLY initially built system without anything from GNU (and no
python)...
The question was: is that even possible any more, starting with no gnu software
and compiling everything from scratch?

I tend to interpret your answer as "No" and that the bootstrapping of the gnu
toolchain isn't considered a requirement any more.

I'd only say then - there was "*nix from scratch" once.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug build/25799] python dependency (as strict requirement)

Sourceware - glibc-bugs mailing list
In reply to this post by Sourceware - glibc-bugs mailing list
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25799

--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020, serg.brester at sebres dot de via Glibc-bugs wrote:

> Assume you have ONLY initially built system without anything from GNU (and no
> python)...
> The question was: is that even possible any more, starting with no gnu software
> and compiling everything from scratch?

I'm pretty sure you can build Python with a non-GNU C compiler, if you're
starting from a proprietary Unix with the OS-provided proprietary C
compiler (as would have been the typical starting point for people
building GCC in the 1980s and early 1990s).  To build GCC you do of course
now need a C++ compiler, but I think the last version of GCC that could be
built as C works for building current GCC (until GCC moves to requiring
C++11, at which point the bootstrap sequence from a C compiler will become
longer).

> I tend to interpret your answer as "No" and that the bootstrapping of the gnu
> toolchain isn't considered a requirement any more.

Look at the Guix / GNU Mes project's work on bootstrapping with a reduced
binary seed.  Guix / GNU Mes is where such issues are addressed in the GNU
project, not glibc.  It may not yet be at the point of the starting
binaries needed being of the size that someone can assemble by hand, but
that would be a natural end-goal to aim for.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.