This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Use gen-libm-test.py to generate ulps table for manual
On 08/13/2018 12:01 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Aug 13 2018, Carlos O'Donell <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Even in Fedora where we do stage1/2/3 boostrapping, we have to build
>> glibc much later to enable manual building because we haven't yet
>> built the tex packages.
> texinfo does not require tex.
Sorry, I meant to write texinfo.
> Currently the following packages are part of the bootstrap cycle:
> acl, attr, audit, autoconf, automake, bc, binutils, bison, bzip2, cpio,
> cracklib, dejagnu, dwz, e2fsprogs, ed, elfutils, expect, fdupes, file,
> findutils, flex, gawk, gcc, gcc8, gdbm, gettext-runtime-mini, glibc,
> gmp, gpm, gzip, help2man, isl, keyutils, krb5-mini, libcap, libcap-ng,
> libdb-4_8, libnsl, libselinux, libsemanage, libsepol, libtirpc, libtool,
> libustr, libverto, libzio, linux-glibc-devel, lua-macros, lua53, m4,
> make, mpc, mpfr, ncurses, pam, patch, pcre, perl, perl-Text-Unidecode,
> perl-gettext, pkg-config, popt, readline, rpm, screen, shadow,
> system-user-root, system-users, systemd-rpm-macros, systemtap-headers,
> sysuser-tools, tcl, tcpd, texinfo, update-alternatives, utempter,
> util-linux, which, xz, zlib
I'm impressed, you've done a really good job keeping this minimal, but what's
the problem with including python here?
Are you simply disappointed that your minimal list will need to grow a bit?
Is there a technical issue at hand?