| 1 |
Patrice Clement wrote: |
| 2 |
>> netbsd-ubin |
| 3 |
>> 14 | m4 -> sys-devel/m4 = OK |
| 4 |
>> 15 | patch -> sys-devel/patch = OK |
| 5 |
>> 22 | sed -> sys-apps/sed = OK |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Be careful there: all of them prepend the binaries names with a g when |
| 8 |
>> userland isn't gnu. On FreeBSD, with portage we use the GNU versions |
| 9 |
>> (see profiles/default/bsd/fbsd which aliases them) but BSD versions have |
| 10 |
>> been preferred as, respectively, m4, patch and sed. This raises the |
| 11 |
>> question: what userland do you want to have? IMHO it is better to have |
| 12 |
>> a full BSD userland while stuff that require GNU tools can use the g |
| 13 |
>> prefixed tools; with that idea you can see portage as a pkgsrc |
| 14 |
>> replacement (or ports replacement in case of fbsd) instead of a |
| 15 |
>> different system with a netbsd kernel & libc but with the rest of it |
| 16 |
>> being GNU. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I didn't know that, and it's great if "g" suffix is added. |
| 19 |
> But Portage needs some GNU tools like GNU sed: some scripts/patches |
| 20 |
> don't work if you don't use it. Same thing about awk: |
| 21 |
> I read ebuild.sh source code and "gawk" command is used. I'll correct this but |
| 22 |
> I'll still install them in my stage. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Basically, keep NetBSD versions of those utilities to get NetBSD itself |
| 26 |
built successfully, then alias the GNU versions for portage to compile |
| 27 |
ebuild successfully. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
>> netbsd-binutils, netbsd-gcc: what's the point of these wrt |
| 30 |
>> sys-devel/{binutils,gcc} ? |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> NetBSD devs seem to have patched GCC sources to suit to NetBSD. I maybe writing |
| 34 |
> a big mistake. But I have tried every GCC's ebuilds and none of them have |
| 35 |
> worked. Even by downloading GCC sources on gcc.gnu.org website, ./configure and |
| 36 |
> make, it simply doesn't work. That's why I've created an ebuild.. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Ahh good old times. FreeBSD devs did also patch GCC sources to work on |
| 40 |
FreeBSD. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/192403 for what it takes to get "our |
| 41 |
toolchain" to behave properly on FreeBSD. And that's why I asked some |
| 42 |
time ago if you managed to compile the kernel with a gentoo toolchain, |
| 43 |
it's a big pain in the back :D. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
There might be many things patched, however those in the gcc spec are |
| 46 |
key to get a working gcc, and lucky us, the specs don't vary too much, |
| 47 |
so you can try a diff between NetBSD gcc specs versus GNU gcc specs to |
| 48 |
spot what's missing/required. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
From there you can start a "copy" of your sys-devel/gcc ebuild of |
| 51 |
choice, and add patches as required, once you get a somewhat working |
| 52 |
version the patches can be tested/reviewed by the GNU devs to iron out |
| 53 |
what's not required, what's correct, and what's wrong. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
And here is where the legal BSD vs GPL battle starts, cause you can't |
| 56 |
add BSD copyrighted code into GPL code :D, fun fun. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
As a last note, beware that some of the ebuilds in portage may not |
| 59 |
compile correctly or at all if they don't use a GNU (gentooized, but gnu |
| 60 |
at it's heart) toolchain, which includes the versions of the utils |
| 61 |
stated above (m4, sed, awk, etc), binutils, and gcc. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
Salu2!, |
| 64 |
Javier. |
Archives