diff options
| author | Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> | 2025-10-11 04:19:12 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> | 2025-10-11 08:07:20 +0100 |
| commit | 6bb573b35fd1a692d222304b8ce6f168b0026869 (patch) | |
| tree | 6952d7e8242a04c52ca2a4fa2080802f0aa34ab0 /dev-cpp/libmcpp/files/libmcpp-2.7.2-fix-build-system.patch | |
| parent | b11128211a033b797a411233c255c6fcc1fc579c (diff) | |
| download | gentoo-6bb573b35fd1a692d222304b8ce6f168b0026869.tar.gz gentoo-6bb573b35fd1a692d222304b8ce6f168b0026869.tar.bz2 gentoo-6bb573b35fd1a692d222304b8ce6f168b0026869.zip | |
toolchain.eclass: stop building JIT separately
We introduced a split for libgccjit because it needs --enable-host-shared
for bug #843341, but I think this was a mistake in the end:
* We don't bootstrap that first, host-shared build because otherwise the
build would take even longer;
* gcc PR117047 is an example where not-bootstrapping causes very-hard-to-debug
problems because libgccjit may be compiled differently by a newer compiler,
but you can't just rebuild GCC once to observe that. Even knowing this*,
I was stumped by it for some time;
* It introduces complexities into the ebuild and it's already complex enough.
See bug #954077 and bug #953823;
* We want to support rust_codegen_gcc (a rustc codegen backend using libgccjit)
in the future. If we do that, we want a bootstrapped build for libgccjit
to know it's reliable;
* The test setup as-is doesn't run tests for the first build;
* On slower machines, that first "wasted" build is pretty noticeable
and slow.
I think any possible slowdown should be mitigated by using LTO and possibly
-fno-semantic-interposition for GCC, which users are free to do.
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/843341
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/954077
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/953823
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'dev-cpp/libmcpp/files/libmcpp-2.7.2-fix-build-system.patch')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
