Before, we'd always use `cc = null`, and check for that. The problem is
this breaks for cross compilation to platforms that don't support a C
compiler.
It's a very subtle issue. One might think there is no problem because we
have `stdenvNoCC`, and presumably one would only build derivations that
use that. The problem is that one still wants to use tools at build-time
that are themselves built with a C compiler, and those are gotten via
"splicing". The runtime version of those deps will explode, but the
build time / `buildPackages` versions of those deps will be fine, and
splicing attempts to work this by using `builtins.tryEval` to filter out
any broken "higher priority" packages (runtime is the default and
highest priority) so that both `foo` and `foo.nativeDrv` works.
However, `tryEval` only catches certain evaluation failures (e.g.
exceptions), and not arbitrary failures (such as `cc.attr` when `cc` is
null). This means `tryEval` fails to let us use our build time deps, and
everything comes apart.
The right solution is, as usually, to get rid of splicing. Or, baring
that, to make it so `foo` never works and one has to explicitly do
`foo.*`. But that is a much larger change, and certaily one unsuitable
to be backported to stable.
Given that, we instead make an exception-throwing `cc` attribute, and
create a `hasCC` attribute for those derivations which wish to
condtionally use a C compiler: instead of doing `stdenv.cc or null ==
null` or something similar, one does `stdenv.hasCC`. This allows quering
without "tripping" the exception, while also allowing `tryEval` to work.
No platform without a C compiler is yet wired up by default. That will
be done in a following commit.
Adds pkgsCross.wasm32 and pkgsCross.wasm64. Use it to build Nixpkgs
with a WebAssembly toolchain.
stdenv/cross: use static overlay on isWasm
isWasm doesn’t make sense dynamically linked.
* add generic x86_32 support
- Add support for i386-i586.
- Add `isx86_32` predicate that can replace most uses of `isi686`.
- `isi686` is reinterpreted to mean "exactly i686 arch, and not say i585 or i386".
- This branch was used to build working i586 kernel running on i586 hardware.
* revert `isi[345]86`, remove dead code
- Remove changes to dead code in `doubles.nix` and `for-meta.nix`.
- Remove `isi[345]86` predicates since other cpu families don't have specific model predicates.
* remove i386-linux since linux not supported on that cpu
With the previous commit `propagateDoc` is now always given the correct value
(i.e. it is never set to `true` when there are no `man` and `info` outputs).
Hence, we can simply symlink the original outputs to the wrapper outputs.
Pros:
- simpler, less indirection compared to `propagated-user-env-packages`,
- uses less inodes (1 symlink, which nix then simply automatically resolves
and removes, vs. two directories and a file),
- makes direct references like "export MANPATH=${stdenv.cc.man}/share/man"
simply work.
Cons:
- I'm not aware of any.
This and the previous commit together almost completely revert commits
fde7296a47,
fa41297209, and
c981787db9.
- respect libc’s incdir and libdir
- make non-unix systems single threaded
- set LIMITS_H_TEST to false for avr
- misc updates to support new libc’s
- use multilib with avr
For threads we want to use:
- posix on unix systems
- win32 on windows
- single on everything else
For avr:
- add library directories for avrlibc
- to disable relro and bind
- avr5 should have precedence over avr3 - otherwise gcc uses the wrong one
02c09e0171 (NixOS/nixpkgs#44558) was reverted in
c981787db9 but, as it turns out, it fixed an issue
I didn't know about at the time: the values of `propagateDoc` options were
(and now again are) inconsistent with the underlying things those wrappers wrap
(see NixOS/nixpkgs#46119), which was (and now is) likely to produce more instances
of NixOS/nixpkgs#43547, if not now, then eventually as stdenv changes.
This patch (which is a simplified version of the original reverted patch) is the
simplest solution to this whole thing: it forces wrappers to directly inspect the
outputs of the things they are wrapping instead of making stdenv guess the correct
values.
The hack of using `crossConfig` to enforce stricter handling of
dependencies is replaced with a dedicated `strictDeps` for that purpose.
(Experience has shown that my punning was a terrible idea that made more
difficult and embarrising to teach teach.)
Now that is is clear, a few packages now use `strictDeps`, to fix
various bugs:
- bintools-wrapper and cc-wrapper
... binutils and gcc add it already anyway.
Without this it's easy to get cross-toolchain paths longer than 256
chars and nix-daemon will then fail to commit them to /nix/store on XFS.
Following legacy packing conventions, `isArm` was defined just for
32-bit ARM instruction set. This is confusing to non packagers though,
because Aarch64 is an ARM instruction set.
The official ARM overview for ARMv8[1] is surprisingly not confusing,
given the overall state of affairs for ARM naming conventions, and
offers us a solution. It divides the nomenclature into three levels:
```
ISA: ARMv8 {-A, -R, -M}
/ \
Mode: Aarch32 Aarch64
| / \
Encoding: A64 A32 T32
```
At the top is the overall v8 instruction set archicture. Second are the
two modes, defined by bitwidth but differing in other semantics too, and
buttom are the encodings, (hopefully?) isomorphic if they encode the
same mode.
The 32 bit encodings are mostly backwards compatible with previous
non-Thumb and Thumb encodings, and if so we can pun the mode names to
instead mean "sets of compatable or isomorphic encodings", and then
voilà we have nice names for 32-bit and 64-bit arm instruction sets
which do not use the word ARM so as to not confused either laymen or
experienced ARM packages.
[1]: https://developer.arm.com/products/architecture/a-profile
(cherry picked from commit ba52ae5048)
Following legacy packing conventions, `isArm` was defined just for
32-bit ARM instruction set. This is confusing to non packagers though,
because Aarch64 is an ARM instruction set.
The official ARM overview for ARMv8[1] is surprisingly not confusing,
given the overall state of affairs for ARM naming conventions, and
offers us a solution. It divides the nomenclature into three levels:
```
ISA: ARMv8 {-A, -R, -M}
/ \
Mode: Aarch32 Aarch64
| / \
Encoding: A64 A32 T32
```
At the top is the overall v8 instruction set archicture. Second are the
two modes, defined by bitwidth but differing in other semantics too, and
buttom are the encodings, (hopefully?) isomorphic if they encode the
same mode.
The 32 bit encodings are mostly backwards compatible with previous
non-Thumb and Thumb encodings, and if so we can pun the mode names to
instead mean "sets of compatable or isomorphic encodings", and then
voilà we have nice names for 32-bit and 64-bit arm instruction sets
which do not use the word ARM so as to not confused either laymen or
experienced ARM packages.
[1]: https://developer.arm.com/products/architecture/a-profile
