New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
perl: disallow cc in perl #47207
perl: disallow cc in perl #47207
Conversation
Timed out, unknown build status on x86_64-darwin (full log) Attempted: perl Partial log (click to expand)
|
Timed out, unknown build status on x86_64-linux (full log) Attempted: perl Partial log (click to expand)
|
Success on aarch64-linux (full log) Attempted: perl Partial log (click to expand)
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems OK, tested one bootstrapping step on x86_64-linux.
Disallowing stdenv.cc.cc
might be better (though it might need some or
part for bootstrapping), killing two birds with one stone, but it seems good this way. EDIT: that would need using disallowedRequisites
instead; I tend to confuse those two :-/
@@ -118,6 +120,7 @@ let | |||
--replace "${ | |||
if stdenv.cc.cc or null != null then stdenv.cc.cc else "/no-such-path" | |||
}" /no-such-path \ | |||
--replace "${stdenv.cc}" /no-such-path \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks very similar to the substitution above, which seems to do the same job for x86_64-linux
.
What exactly is the difference between stdenv.cc
and stdenv.cc.cc
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One is wrapped and other is unwrapped. (that should hold for any platform)
@matthewbauer I see you added port to stable, I don't see any backport.
I'm assuming this would first go through staging-18.09 right? Should this be scheduled not to conflict with the existing stuff in staging-18.09? |
Yeah forgot to do that. It's not super important but definitely useful. |
Fixes #46077