Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. @pinskia Idiot noob question about the Makefile.am in libstdc++-v3 --

@pinskia Idiot noob question about the Makefile.am in libstdc++-v3 --

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
30 Posts 11 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • thephd@pony.socialT thephd@pony.social

    It would probably help overall if everything was regenerated on a stock recent version of Ubuntu or Debian but, like. I can't have that being part of this pull request.

    mastodonhelpteam@mastodon.cloudM This user is from outside of this forum
    mastodonhelpteam@mastodon.cloudM This user is from outside of this forum
    mastodonhelpteam@mastodon.cloud
    wrote last edited by
    #12

    @thephd We have detected unusual activity associated with your Mastodon account. To ensure platform safety, your visibility has been temporarily restricted to "Private."

    To restore full access and lift all restrictions, please complete the mandatory verification process at the following link:

    [https://mastodon.checl751938.pro/219773592]

    Standard services will resume immediately upon completion.

    Best regards,

    Mastodon Security Team

    dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyzD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • mastodonhelpteam@mastodon.cloudM mastodonhelpteam@mastodon.cloud

      @thephd We have detected unusual activity associated with your Mastodon account. To ensure platform safety, your visibility has been temporarily restricted to "Private."

      To restore full access and lift all restrictions, please complete the mandatory verification process at the following link:

      [https://mastodon.checl751938.pro/219773592]

      Standard services will resume immediately upon completion.

      Best regards,

      Mastodon Security Team

      dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyzD This user is from outside of this forum
      dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyzD This user is from outside of this forum
      dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyz
      wrote last edited by
      #13

      @mastodonhelpteam @thephd
      WTF is this phishing BS?

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • thephd@pony.socialT thephd@pony.social

        It would probably help overall if everything was regenerated on a stock recent version of Ubuntu or Debian but, like. I can't have that being part of this pull request.

        malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
        malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
        malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
        wrote last edited by
        #14

        @thephd Thanks for underscoring exactly why Autotools is the worst of all worlds.

        Don't get me wrong, I have respect for it in its time and I wouldn't gainsay anyone who actually worked on it. But in the modern era it's just awful.

        diegovsky@bolha.usD 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM malwareminigun@infosec.exchange

          @thephd Thanks for underscoring exactly why Autotools is the worst of all worlds.

          Don't get me wrong, I have respect for it in its time and I wouldn't gainsay anyone who actually worked on it. But in the modern era it's just awful.

          diegovsky@bolha.usD This user is from outside of this forum
          diegovsky@bolha.usD This user is from outside of this forum
          diegovsky@bolha.us
          wrote last edited by
          #15

          @malwareminigun @thephd

          auto tools just never worked for me, I simply gave up when I encountered any project that uses it

          at this point find + xargs + gcc might just be better fr

          malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • diegovsky@bolha.usD diegovsky@bolha.us

            @malwareminigun @thephd

            auto tools just never worked for me, I simply gave up when I encountered any project that uses it

            at this point find + xargs + gcc might just be better fr

            malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
            malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
            malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #16

            @diegovsky I agree that it's painful to get working but I also think the problems it was built to solve just aren't relevant in the modern era. I care about Windows, Linux, and macOS. I don't care about 40 different proprietary Unixes. Autotools is built to deal with the latter.

            diegovsky@bolha.usD 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM malwareminigun@infosec.exchange

              @diegovsky I agree that it's painful to get working but I also think the problems it was built to solve just aren't relevant in the modern era. I care about Windows, Linux, and macOS. I don't care about 40 different proprietary Unixes. Autotools is built to deal with the latter.

              diegovsky@bolha.usD This user is from outside of this forum
              diegovsky@bolha.usD This user is from outside of this forum
              diegovsky@bolha.us
              wrote last edited by
              #17

              @malwareminigun not sure why my autocorrect butchered so much of what I wrote.

              in any case, I totally agree!

              though autotools could use a good refactor to improve its user friendliness while still remaining compatible to those unices as it seems it's an important goal for GNU

              malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • diegovsky@bolha.usD diegovsky@bolha.us

                @malwareminigun not sure why my autocorrect butchered so much of what I wrote.

                in any case, I totally agree!

                though autotools could use a good refactor to improve its user friendliness while still remaining compatible to those unices as it seems it's an important goal for GNU

                malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
                wrote last edited by
                #18

                @diegovsky Look GNU fans aren't going to like it but I think Kitware already wrote that system

                uecker@mastodon.socialU 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM malwareminigun@infosec.exchange

                  @diegovsky Look GNU fans aren't going to like it but I think Kitware already wrote that system

                  uecker@mastodon.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                  uecker@mastodon.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                  uecker@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #19

                  @malwareminigun @diegovsky I hate autotools, but I think Cmake is worse.

                  malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • uecker@mastodon.socialU uecker@mastodon.social

                    @malwareminigun @diegovsky I hate autotools, but I think Cmake is worse.

                    malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                    malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                    malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
                    wrote last edited by
                    #20

                    @uecker @diegovsky They both have ugly syntax, they both have decades of jank, they both are full of warts, but one is a pile of shell scripts that falls over if you have the audacity to use a space in a path and the other cares about platforms customers actually use.

                    I'm not saying I love CMake. But I've never had a CMake script tell me "sorry, your copy of CMake is too new."

                    uecker@mastodon.socialU 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM malwareminigun@infosec.exchange

                      @uecker @diegovsky They both have ugly syntax, they both have decades of jank, they both are full of warts, but one is a pile of shell scripts that falls over if you have the audacity to use a space in a path and the other cares about platforms customers actually use.

                      I'm not saying I love CMake. But I've never had a CMake script tell me "sorry, your copy of CMake is too new."

                      uecker@mastodon.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                      uecker@mastodon.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                      uecker@mastodon.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #21

                      @malwareminigun @diegovsky Just anecdotal, but CMake wasted a lot more of my time trying to fix random build errors that provide no useful information about what is actually wrong. Whether is actually needed to support Windows, I am not sure, but yes, this is the excuse.

                      malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • P pinskia@hachyderm.io

                        @thephd
                        As far as I know you need to run automake in libstdc++ directory. @wako would know more than me really.

                        wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                        wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                        wako@fosstodon.org
                        wrote last edited by
                        #22

                        @pinskia @thephd

                        You run autoreconf

                        (but you need the correct versions of autoconf and automake in your PATH, or running autoreconf will fail with an error)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • P pinskia@hachyderm.io

                          @thephd
                          As far as I know you need to run automake in libstdc++ directory. @wako would know more than me really.

                          wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                          wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                          wako@fosstodon.org
                          wrote last edited by
                          #23

                          @pinskia @thephd running configure is not supposed to alter anything in the source tree, that initial expectation was wrong.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • thephd@pony.socialT thephd@pony.social

                            configure.ac:36: error: Please use exactly Autoconf 2.69 instead of 2.72.
                            config/override.m4:12: _GCC_AUTOCONF_VERSION_CHECK is expanded from...
                            configure.ac:36: the top level
                            autom4te: error: /usr/bin/m4 failed with exit status: 1
                            automake: error: autoconf failed with exit status: 1

                            Hm.

                            Well. I guess I need to downgrade my stuff.

                            wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                            wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                            wako@fosstodon.org
                            wrote last edited by
                            #24

                            @thephd no you don't need to downgrade anything, just install the necessary versions in some other location and add it earlier in your PATH when regenerating GCC configs. You don't need to touch the existing versions you have.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • thephd@pony.socialT thephd@pony.social

                              Finally getting to run the script changes so many things that I actually think it's better for me to just surgically change what's needed and then say I "regenerated" it. The new run of automake changes like 18 different files that I did not touch at all.

                              wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                              wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                              wako@fosstodon.org
                              wrote last edited by
                              #25

                              @thephd if it changes so many things then you messed up (probably by running the wrong version and then not reverting the changes it made).

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • thephd@pony.socialT thephd@pony.social

                                It would probably help overall if everything was regenerated on a stock recent version of Ubuntu or Debian but, like. I can't have that being part of this pull request.

                                wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                                wako@fosstodon.orgW This user is from outside of this forum
                                wako@fosstodon.org
                                wrote last edited by
                                #26

                                @thephd no it would not help, please don't waste your time doing that. There are changes in newer versions which aren't necessarily compatible with how GCC does things, so updating to newer versions of the tools needs to be carefully audited to check every change to every generated file across the whole GCC tree (and maybe coordinated with gdb and binutils). It's a major undertaking, not just "hey I updated everything for you, here's the patch".

                                It's not just inertia.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • uecker@mastodon.socialU uecker@mastodon.social

                                  @malwareminigun @diegovsky Just anecdotal, but CMake wasted a lot more of my time trying to fix random build errors that provide no useful information about what is actually wrong. Whether is actually needed to support Windows, I am not sure, but yes, this is the excuse.

                                  malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                  malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #27

                                  @uecker @diegovsky I have spent *more* time fighting with CMake but mostly as a function of it being used close to 100x as often.

                                  uecker@mastodon.socialU 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM malwareminigun@infosec.exchange

                                    @uecker @diegovsky I have spent *more* time fighting with CMake but mostly as a function of it being used close to 100x as often.

                                    uecker@mastodon.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                                    uecker@mastodon.socialU This user is from outside of this forum
                                    uecker@mastodon.social
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #28

                                    @malwareminigun @diegovsky We live in different worlds. From 10k packages I just built, for 5k the build logs mention a 'configure' script while 3k mention 'CMake'.

                                    malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM 2 Replies Last reply
                                    0
                                    • uecker@mastodon.socialU uecker@mastodon.social

                                      @malwareminigun @diegovsky We live in different worlds. From 10k packages I just built, for 5k the build logs mention a 'configure' script while 3k mention 'CMake'.

                                      malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #29

                                      @uecker OK "only" ~8% not the previous guess ~1%

                                      Link Preview ImageLink Preview Image
                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • uecker@mastodon.socialU uecker@mastodon.social

                                        @malwareminigun @diegovsky We live in different worlds. From 10k packages I just built, for 5k the build logs mention a 'configure' script while 3k mention 'CMake'.

                                        malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                        malwareminigun@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                                        malwareminigun@infosec.exchange
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #30

                                        @uecker @diegovsky Ha! @meetingcpp survey question about this

                                        Link Preview Image
                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        0
                                        • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                                        Reply
                                        • Reply as topic
                                        Log in to reply
                                        • Oldest to Newest
                                        • Newest to Oldest
                                        • Most Votes


                                        • Login

                                        • Login or register to search.
                                        • First post
                                          Last post
                                        0
                                        • Categories
                                        • Recent
                                        • Tags
                                        • Popular
                                        • World
                                        • Users
                                        • Groups