Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 2/3] ovmf: drop gcc-12 specific BUILD_CFLAGS setting

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, 2026-05-12 at 11:17 +0200, Joao Marcos Costa wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On 5/12/26 11:06, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2026-05-12 at 11:02 +0200, Joao Marcos Costa wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > On 5/12/26 10:46, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2026-05-11 at 16:00 +0200, Joao Marcos Costa via
> > > > lists.openembedded.org wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 5/11/26 15:52, Quentin Schulz via lists.openembedded.org
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > (...)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Not necessarily true as I don't think we build GCC for
> > > > > > native recipes
> > > > > > (and ovmf has a native variant), so it depends on the GCC
> > > > > > on the host
> > > > > > (unless you have uninative?). I don't know the autobuilder
> > > > > > infrastructure, e.g. whether we build patches on multiple
> > > > > > workers on
> > > > > > different distros to have a big GCC version test matrix.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > But yes, building with a newer GCC will generally not make
> > > > > > warnings from
> > > > > > previous versions disappear and I'm hoping upstream has had
> > > > > > time to fix
> > > > > > warnings returned by GCC12 in the last 4 years :)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Quentin
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yep, my whole point is based on the the distros in
> > > > > SANITY_TESTED_DISTROS
> > > > > being recent enough to ship GCC > 12 :)
> > > > > 
> > > > > I should have made it explicit in my commit message.
> > > > 
> > > > I hate to say this but:
> > > > 
> > > > Alma/Centos/Rocky 8 have gcc 8
> > > > Debian 11 has gcc 10
> > > > 
> > > > and we don't use buildtools on debian 11.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm therefore not sure how you concluded that from
> > > > SANITY_TESTED_DISTROS.
> > > > 
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > 
> > > > Richard
> > > 
> > > Ah, my bad...
> > > 
> > >   From this list here:
> > > https://docs.yoctoproject.org/ref-manual/system-requirements.html#supported-linux-distributions
> > > 
> > > Considering the versions of Fedora and Ubuntu, I presumed the
> > > other
> > > distros were at least as recent (in terms of packages versions)
> > > as
> > > Fedora 39 (which ships GCC 13).
> > > 
> > > I will check the results in SWAT to see if this warnings pops up,
> > > but
> > > the commit message could use a rewording to address this point
> > > and also
> > > some questions raised by Quentin, so a v2 will be sent later in
> > > this week.
> > 
> > We currently support distros with gcc 10, I think that is clear.
> 
> It is clear, yes, but my point here is the -Wno-error=stringop-
> overflow 
> already being available upstream in the version of edk2 we currently 
> use, and - as per what I understood in their git history - the flag
> was 
> added for the very same reason we have it in the recipe.

Ok, that makes sense. 

Cheers,

Richard