Build gperf as a dependency before gcc for arm releases

[emaste]

Summary

Older u-boot versions hardcode the use of a host gcc compiler, and gcc relies on having gperf available so we must build and install it first.

[gjb]

release/arm/release.sh

133 ↗

(On Diff #2748)

I've tried this exact change, which sadly does not work.

Discussed in IRC with imp@, building gcc(1) should not be necessary with the sysutils/u-boot-* ports.

[emaste]

Separate gperf build and install

[gjb]

I've applied this change to the set of builds that are in-flight now, though I'd still prefer using the ports ian@ worked on, and avoid building gcc(1) within the build chroot entirely.

[emaste]

I agree moving to the ports is the right path forward, but hopefully this will get things moving again until that switchover.

[imp]

release/arm/release.sh

130 ↗

(On Diff #2822)

while this will work, you should transition over to using the u-boot ports for the supported boards, which pulls in the right u-boot and cross compiler...

[emaste]

Further split make targets

[emaste]

release/arm/release.sh

132–133 ↗

(On Diff #2831)

Without splitting obj out I get "Warning: Object directory not changed from original /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/gperf" - i.e., gperf ended up built in the src tree instead of under /usr/obj.

[gjb]

release/arm/release.sh

132–133 ↗

(On Diff #2831)

I don't expect this to make a difference, to be honest.

When originally trying to build gperf(1) standalone, I did 'make -C /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/gperf obj depend all install', which resulted in the same failures I've been seeing, which means something is fundamentally broken here.

Splitting up the make(1) targets should not be a fix.

[emaste]

Closed by commit rS276189 (authored by @emaste).