powerpc64 example, base/binutils presence vs. devel/powerpc64-gcc build failure: "phase: build-depends" confused then gcc config aborts build

[John Baldwin]

On 10/15/18 11:06 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 10:20 AM John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org <mailto:jhb at freebsd.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 10/12/18 6:51 AM, Mark Millard wrote:
>     > The following is from attempting to build devel/powerpc-gcc
>     > via poudriere-devel on the powerpc64 system after having
>     > bootstrapped via (in part) base/binutils and the .txz
>     > produced on the host (amd64).
>     >
>     > Looks like having both:
>     >
>     > /usr/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-*
>     > and:
>     > /usr/local/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-*
>     >
>     > in a powerpc64 environment confuses "phase: build-depends"
>     > in poudriere for the devel/powerpc64-gcc build:
> 
>     Ah, I could see that.  I had kept the longer binary names with the full tuple
>     since the original base/binutils had them, but I've considered stripping them
>     as we only really need /usr/bin/as, etc. for the base system.  I hadn't gotten
>     to the point of trying to build any ports with base/* as I'm still trying to
>     just do a buildworld (and running poudriere in a qemu image of mips64 would
>     be very unpleasant).  I think probably base/binutils just needs to drop the
>     names with a full tuple if possible.
> 
> 
> Having symlinks to the long names plays nicer with autoconf, of at least has in the past. Our build system doesn't care, though...

I think it only plays nicer for the port.  We've never had /usr/bin/x86_64-freebsd-ld
linked to /usr/bin/ld in base, and base/binutils' role is to provide /usr/bin/as,
/usr/bin/ld, etc.

-- 
John Baldwin