In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org

Hi Eric! Glad you are interested:

1. Yes libgcc, but also the other gcc runtime libraries. (libssp, libstdc++ are two of them off hand)

2. Don't worry about "bootstrapping" too much, just consider that before we build libgcc we may not have a libgcc, etc. A lot of compiler devs are working on regular machines and doing builds where they already have 1 copy of everything, which allows being more sloppy about depedencies and breaking cycles. Building compiler and libraries together is bad for a few reasons, but those reasons might mainly be in my head haha. Examples:

   • cross compiling mean can mean the libraries are for one platform and the compiler itself is for another. But having the installed outputs of a package involve two platforms that way is really messy and breaks assumptions in other packaging infra
   • That fact that some of the libraries do need a libc, and the libc is a separate package, means we have zig-zag problem (finishing the compiler build depeneds on downstream package build which depends on the compielr build) we can get around this by building things twice but that is ugly and wasteful

Ah, I see. I looked around a bit more at Exherbo's GCC build script and it looks like they just turn off a lot of features in the source tree before configuring the project, along with explicitly specifying many of the build tools (https://gitlab.exherbo.org/exherbo/arbor/-/blob/master/packages/sys-devel/gcc/gcc.exlib?ref_type=heads#L172). Also, I think I found an old thread talking about Exherbo that you created a while ago and I'll look into that for more info on Exherbo's relevance to Nix (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/21471). One thing I'm still a bit confused about though, is how the gcc-${version}-lib and gcc-${version}-libgcc packages are currently being built. From what I can tell, they are the dynamic library versions of each, and the static library versions are included in the gcc-${version} package. Are they simply a recompilation of the packages after the big monorepo GCC is compiled? Is this what you're referring to in terms of building things twice being wasteful?

Also, is it okay if I direct message you if I have any more questions? I'd prefer not to clog up the chat here.

In reply to @thatliuser:matrix.org

Ah, I see. I looked around a bit more at Exherbo's GCC build script and it looks like they just turn off a lot of features in the source tree before configuring the project, along with explicitly specifying many of the build tools (https://gitlab.exherbo.org/exherbo/arbor/-/blob/master/packages/sys-devel/gcc/gcc.exlib?ref_type=heads#L172). Also, I think I found an old thread talking about Exherbo that you created a while ago and I'll look into that for more info on Exherbo's relevance to Nix (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/21471). One thing I'm still a bit confused about though, is how the gcc-${version}-lib and gcc-${version}-libgcc packages are currently being built. From what I can tell, they are the dynamic library versions of each, and the static library versions are included in the gcc-${version} package. Are they simply a recompilation of the packages after the big monorepo GCC is compiled? Is this what you're referring to in terms of building things twice being wasteful?

Also, is it okay if I direct message you if I have any more questions? I'd prefer not to clog up the chat here.

In reply to @cldrpr:matrix.org
John Ericson: Re: GCC project - Requesting a review of my initial draft proposal (here: https://github.com/cloudripper/GSoC-24/blob/main/gsoc-proposal-draft.pdf). Please let me know if I need to be more granular or descriptive in my project plan or abstract - and if there are any other important project-specific sections you feel I should include (I will include other personal sections prior to submission). Additionally, if there are others interested in this project, I would be happy to modify as needed to try and avoid overlap.

In reply to @Ericson2314:matrix.org
I have a very specific vision in mind as to how this should work, and the draft PR already that was linked in the issue, but I expect to only be able to be able to convey that to anay mentee though an interative / dialogue process