update

I’ve spent the day rewriting from scratch the python script to build all GCC versions.

It’s coming along nicely. I sorted out the problem from yesterday – it’s another (I’ve never seen anything but) spurious, meaningless error message. It was actually induced by the experimentation I’d been doing to build glibc. When I removed that, things were “fine” – I say in quoted because I have no idea if what I’m building is sane. If you run the test suite, you always get tons of errors anyway – they’re expected. Expected by the people who know what’s expected, which makes the test suite fractionally useful to the rest of us.

So the script now downloads all the source code, then makes all binutils and installs them, then makes all GCCs (using the right binutils, but the wrong glibc – uses the system glibc – because I’e not figured out (yet?) how to build glibc, since it’s even worse thn GCC, and believe me, that sayin’ something).

I’ve been building all the binutils.

It’s a bloody mess. The problem in particular is the docs. Binutils (like GCC) uses “makeinfo”, from package “texinfo”. Problem is newer texinfos don’t work with older binutils, and there’s no way to turn off doc generation.

So as a result, I cannot build 2.23.2, 2.20.1, 2.19 and 2.18. I also can’t build 2.17, because the build is actually broken.

One thing which is puzzling me is that – well, there seem to be two sources for binutils downloads. There’s ftp.gnu.org, which you’d think was canonical, only it’s missing some versions, which I have found over at ftp://sourceware.org/pub/binutils/releases/. Thing is, both of them have releases with the same versions but where there’s a second file with an “a” suffix, i.e. “2.19.1” and “2.19.1a”.

I can find no information at all as to what the “a” is supposed to mean. I suspect it may mean “we buggered up the first build, here’s the real one”, in which case “a” releases should always supersede. I think it’s not very likely this will solve the makeinfo problem though.

GCC actually suffers from the same problem, but if texinfo is not present, it doesn’t try to build the docs, so you can work around the problem (you just don’t get any docs).