IRC channel logs

<matrix_bridge><Andrius Štikonas> gtker: I've now removed // CONSTANT from mescc-tools

<matrix_bridge><Andrius Štikonas> so only M2libc stuff left

<matrix_bridge><Andrius Štikonas> I won't look at it today though

<aggi>minor notice: finally, dev-lang/python passed static compile/linking with TinyCC

<aggi>will do some run-time testing with sys-apps/portage next

<aggi>if this passes, then 1) python can be bootstrapped with tinycc and 2) gentoo-tooling can remain self-hosting with tinycc too

<aggi>managed to salvage a recent perl-5.36.0 version besides the older perl-5.8.6; the latter supported with tcc, the former supported with tcc _and_ cross-compilation beyond different ARCH; and with it autotools/autoreconf are available with tinycc

<aggi>major system-integration tooling would be available, both bootstrappable and self-hosting, with tinycc

<aggi>runtime-testing of statically linked perl passed already, hopefully runtime testing of python/portage will too

<AwesomeAdam54321>aggi: Do you think the modifications you made could be sent to the upstream projects? It might be integrated as a supported option

<agg1>AwesomeAdam54321: good question

<agg1>first, i want to publish all this

<agg1>with regards to gentoo, merging with their main portage tree is not feasible since neither #gentoo-toolchain nor #gentoo-releng would consider tinycc support

<agg1>myself would wan't to hit regressions with an overlay, hence i fully forked a _complete_ portage tree for tinycc support already

<agg1>furthermore, i've fully forked kernel linux-2.4 and musl-libc; and ~500ebuilds patched all over the place

<agg1>kernel fork is public already; all else isn't, because 1) python/portage support isn't ready that's required for the crossdev hackjob i did

<agg1>2) #gentoo ban-hammered me for mentioning tinycc support

<agg1>3) i haven't got any resources at all for hosting, and uploading a 500MiB sized ISO with a tinycc driven OS release

<agg1>and 4) any inquiry at local university and various employers in germany was hit by a brickwall of denial and ignorance, so i'm running out of options with regards to other real-life problems

<agg1>*wouldn't wan

<agg1>t

<agg1>AwesomeAdam54321: which upstream project besides?

<agg1>a tinycc driven OS release doesn't exist

<AwesomeAdam54321>aggi: I meant e.g. the Python and Perl patches could be sent upstream to their developers

<agg1>AwesomeAdam54321: i maintain those with ebuilds and patch-folders each

<AwesomeAdam54321>Oh, right

<agg1>i can't coordinate all details for ~500 ebuilds (+kernel fork +libc fork)

<AwesomeAdam54321>If you just kept the ebuilds in a repo, others could build the tinycc Gentoo from scratch right?

<agg1>that's why, the python/portage remaining bootstrappable and self-hosting with tinycc were important

<agg1>AwesomeAdam54321: yes; but for that matter, it's NOT a gentoo project

<agg1>which, as another side-note, was a mistake i made to fork portage tree instead of using some other packaging system to begin with

<agg1>but now i've got those ~500builds patched and hacked already, and want to avoid re-writing this, as an intermediate solution

<lanodan>Well could still push the branch somewhere, like I have an overlay but also some stuff in https://github.com/lanodan/gentoo

<agg1>lanodan: i'll not push to m$ sh**hub

<lanodan>Well *somewhere* it doesn't matters where

<lanodan>Just picked github for this one since I already have that for contributing to gentoo

<agg1>this project deserves a dedicated domain, which i can't afford, simple as that

<deesix>Sorry, but that's a very poor excuse; something like that should not prevent publishing (there're /lots/ of options) if you really want to (which it's your call but... let's be serious, those details could be arranged later).

<deesix>Again, it's your call, no doubt about it.

<agg1>anyway, a bunch of runtime segfaults with python/portage; back to gdb :(

<agg1>perl passed runtime-testing, python doesn't yet

IRC channel logs

2025-05-09.log