[Buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] Build results for 2018-12-16

Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind.be
Mon Dec 17 23:43:07 UTC 2018



On 17/12/2018 09:25, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni at bootlin.com> writes:
> 
>  > Hello,
>  > On Mon, 17 Dec 2018 09:06:46 +0100, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> 
>  >> >      aarch64 | swupdate-2018.11 | NOK |
>  >> > http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/e302d0edb59ff7617b5f2d21f06eb65ae04981fe
>  >> > |
>  >> >          arm | swupdate-2018.11 | NOK |
>  >> > http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/dbb69acadc20b4bb559311348eca276c1e6343f7
>  >> > |
>  >> 
>  >> /bin/sh: /home/naourr/work/instance-0/output/host/bin/aarch64-linux-gnu-cc: No such file or directory
>  >> 
>  >> swupdate uses $CROSS-cc and not $CROSS-gcc, which not all external
>  >> toolchain have. I think it makes sense to add a cc -> gcc symlink for
>  >> external toolchains we download if not present. We cannot really do it
>  >> for pre-installed external toolchains as we might not have write access
>  >> to them.

 So the symlink is then not a good solution IMO.

> 
>  > Does it make sense for swupdate to use -cc instead of -gcc ?
> 
> Maybe not, but a number of packages use cc for compatibility (E.G. they
> should work with other compilers than just gcc).
> 
> E.G. the default built in make rule for .c -> binary uses cc:
> 
> echo 'int main(void) { return 0; }' > test.c
> make test
> cc     test.c   -o test
> 
> So I think it makes sense to add the symlink for compatibility.

 I disagree. We should always override CC, so the default 'cc' should never be used.

 The problem here is that we forget to pass TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS in the
environment of swupdate.

 Regards,
 Arnout


More information about the buildroot mailing list