-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
update some tools in the builder image #5
Comments
also git |
IMO we should use ubuntu:focal (20) as the base. From the "news" at https://packages.ubuntu.com:
|
apt -y update
apt-get -y install software-properties-common
add-apt-repository -y ppa:git-core/ppa
apt -y update
apt -y install git
git --version |
Team discussion led us to the realization that we'd break libc compatibility on RedHat 8 and Debian Buster if we switch the binary release builds from Bionic to Focal. This is based on the following list of distros and their libc versions.
|
@scareything @ekoby What version of |
with build tools I prefer to get the latest, since it is not a runtime dependency nothing is holding us back |
Cool. I'll subscribe this image to |
@ekoby The newest |
I think 11 is fine |
|
Clarification: do we need the v11 of the crossbuild gcc, g++? I know we need the v7 crossbuild gcc, g++ that we're currently using. |
That would be best for consistency unless we switch to clang |
I was able to get clang-7 installed in the Bionic builder. |
These v11 executables are convenient to make available in the Bionic builder image. The ZET build currently breaks with this branch's experimental image because root@2f3302f87b0a:/# ls -lhgo /usr/local/bin/
total 50M
-rwxr-xr-x 4 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 c++
-rwxr-xr-x 1 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 cpp
-rwxr-xr-x 4 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 g++
-rwxr-xr-x 3 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 gcc
-rwxr-xr-x 2 35K Aug 16 23:24 gcc-ar
-rwxr-xr-x 2 35K Aug 16 23:24 gcc-nm
-rwxr-xr-x 2 35K Aug 16 23:24 gcc-ranlib
-rwxr-xr-x 2 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 gccgo
-rwxr-xr-x 1 772K Aug 16 23:24 gcov
-rwxr-xr-x 1 552K Aug 16 23:24 gcov-dump
-rwxr-xr-x 1 572K Aug 16 23:24 gcov-tool
-rwxr-xr-x 2 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 gfortran
-rwxr-xr-x 1 5.0M Aug 16 23:24 go
-rwxr-xr-x 1 210K Aug 16 23:24 gofmt
-rwxr-xr-x 1 28M Aug 16 23:24 lto-dump
-rwxr-xr-x 4 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-c++
-rwxr-xr-x 4 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-g++
-rwxr-xr-x 3 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc
-rwxr-xr-x 3 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-11.4.0
-rwxr-xr-x 2 35K Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-ar
-rwxr-xr-x 2 35K Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-nm
-rwxr-xr-x 2 35K Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-ranlib
-rwxr-xr-x 2 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gccgo
-rwxr-xr-x 2 1.3M Aug 16 23:24 x86_64-linux-gnu-gfortran |
@ekoby @scareything Summary of this issue: It appears feasible but not convenient to provide a full suite of gcc v11 utilities running on the Bionic builder. If it is important to make this happen before we eventually adopt the Focal builder then I'll split that work into a separate issue due to the apparent magnitude of the undertaking. I found it was convenient to install the v7 distro gcc to support building v11. My experimental image has the same set of native target tools that I reported above are present in the official release v11 container image, which is compatible with Bionic's glibc. I didn't yet experiment with building the cross-target suites, but I see the way. Protracted compilation times and container image bloat aside, it looks like it wouldn't be too difficult to configure the default compilers for native targets to use a compiled v11. I didn't yet explore whether that is also true for the cross-target executables. |
from: #1 (review)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: