-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 283
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
do not rename GCC's include-fixed directory by default + add script to regenerate it #3254
do not rename GCC's include-fixed directory by default + add script to regenerate it #3254
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm. Will need to test the script
Should be relatively safe for anyone to revert the changes manually in an existing installation right?
(or rebuild GCCcore) You'd also want the script for the future OS/glibc updates. |
Note that the permissions afterwards won't be exactly as original because of the files created by
More or less yes. If the OS has changed in the meantime then this will run into the original issue.
And afterwards rename the folder. Or rebuild with this PR. There already is
Correct. The newly added script in |
Test report by @Micket Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
Test report by @Micket Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
Test report by @migueldiascosta Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
Test report by @akesandgren Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
Test report by @verdurin Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm working on a commit to tackle the suggested changes...
b74f41f
to
b8cd764
Compare
…k + minor style tweaks
b8cd764
to
be1afb1
Compare
Test report by @boegel Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) edit: this was with a copy of the easyconfig with |
Test report by @boegel Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 5 out of 5 (5 easyconfigs in total) |
@boegelbot please test @ generoso |
@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on login1 PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... - notification for comment with ID 2002088054 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
@boegelbot please test @ jsc-zen3 |
@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on jsczen3l1.int.jsc-zen3.fz-juelich.de PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... - notification for comment with ID 2002092305 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
Test report by @boegelbot Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 8 out of 8 (8 easyconfigs in total) |
Test report by @Micket Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in total) |
Test report by @boegelbot Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 17 out of 17 (17 easyconfigs in total) |
(created using
eb --new-pr
)This adds an EC option to control the renaming of the
include-fixed
directory which is OFF by default because this leads to failures when GCC is "too new" relative to the OS, i.e. we actually want thefixincludes
part of the GCC installation.However as described in #10666 OS upgrades might break those GCC installations when the source headers (of GLIBC) change in a way that make them incompatible with the earlier output of
fixincludes
.However GCC comes with a nice script to (re)generate that folder. Hence I think it makes more sense to make that easier to use by providing a wrapper in
$GCCROOT/easybuild
that calls that script (it is in some subfolder oflibexec
and depends on the architecture and version) and also takes care of file permissions of theinclude-fixed
folderIf that is considered too much we could at least add a symlink to the script into the
easybuild
folder.Fixes #3253