From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC45C433EF for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01AED60F43 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:46 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 01AED60F43 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.buildroot.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB544045E; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D9ven68ryerH; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04C32403EE; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C1DE1BF319 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC5E5606AF for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Eki5ml7SxvBh for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9985F60615 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (Authenticated sender: thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com) by relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FD53240004; Sun, 19 Sep 2021 12:02:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2021 14:02:37 +0200 From: Thomas Petazzoni To: "Yann E. MORIN" Message-ID: <20210919140237.6cf62fa5@windsurf> In-Reply-To: <20210919114547.103955-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr> References: <20210919114547.103955-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] toolchain/custom: hide away incompatible gcc versions X-BeenThere: buildroot@lists.buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Giulio Benetti , Romain Naour , Thomas De Schampheleire , buildroot@buildroot.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@lists.buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" Hello, On Sun, 19 Sep 2021 13:45:47 +0200 "Yann E. MORIN" wrote: > Some CPUs have a requirement on a minimal gcc version. Until now, ot was > possible to use a custom external toolchain that has a gcc older than > the requirement, which would lead to build failures (early!) during the > build. > > Propagate the gcc version requirement down to the external toolchain gcc > version choice. By limiting the selection to acceptable gcc versions, we > inform the user that its toolchain is too old, and if they decide to lie > and select one of available version, we still check that when we extract > and install their toolchain. I think there was a reason to not have these for external toolchains: they can use patched gcc versions that support newer CPU cores that are normally not supported in the same gcc upstream version. It was for example the case I believe at some point for Linaro toolchains. This argument is not necessarily a strong disagreement against your patch, I'm just stating why I believe we hadn't done that in the past. BTW, has there been some recent issue that prompted you to write/submit this change ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training https://bootlin.com _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@lists.buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot