Re: package ldc for aarch64 (and more)

[Marie-Joseph <Marie-Joseph@users.noreply.github.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1674 bytes --]

New comment by Marie-Joseph on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/34752#issuecomment-1003231801

Comment:
> Can you not cross-compile from a more powerful x86_64 machine?

Yes, but only on a laptop that I have to beg and plead to charge. So some days I can, some days I can't. I'll make a follow-up comment with insights I've gained since today is one day I could. Spoiler alert: many things are broken with cross-compilation.

> Does more recent GCC require a D compiler to build gdc? That would make this proposal a no go because it would make bootstrap way more complicated.

Yes, as of (2021-12-29) HEAD it will require a D compiler. If by bootstrap you mean the (build) system bootstrap, I'd like to have a way to only build GDC when doing so explicitly. I'll look into that once I can compile it at all. Although Ada is built by default with the gcc package, and it requires an extant compiler. Assuming a glibc host, we could similarly download one like the gnat switch allows for Ada. If you mean bootstrapping GDC itself, both other D compilers require a D compiler, which is the source of this being such an issue to begin with. DMD only supports x86_64 and i686; LDC currently builds with DMD, therefore LDC can only be built for x86_64. More commentary on this in my next comment.

> if gdc from 11.x is self-hosting and cannot build without another D compiler, i'm absolutely opposed to enabling it
> (also, even in the version in 10.x, it does not support all targets void has)

Both of these points apply to both in-tree D compilers. Adding GDC will actually make D in general available on more platforms.