Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 0/3] BaseTools: fix gcc workaround

["Bob Feng" <bob.c.feng@intel.com>]

Hi Gerd,

Your patches are great but I think we can't take them because of the incompatible license.
I think the new Toolchain definition, like GCC12, can not resolve this issue because Toolchain is not used for building BaseTools.
So I'd prefer the second option of using 'gcc -dumpversion'.

And also we have the task to convert the tools implemented by C to python implementation. After we have done that, there will be no BaseTools build issue.
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-staging/tree/PyBaseTools

@Gao, Liming @Chen, Christine
Could you review the corresponding patch?

Thanks,
Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 6:12 PM
To: Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@gmail.com>
Cc: edk2-devel-groups-io <devel@edk2.groups.io>; Chen, Christine <yuwei.chen@intel.com>; Gao, Liming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Pawel Polawski <ppolawsk@redhat.com>; Feng, Bob C <bob.c.feng@intel.com>; Oliver Steffen <osteffen@redhat.com>; Rebecca Cran <rebecca@bsdio.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 0/3] BaseTools: fix gcc workaround

On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 04:18:56PM +0100, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> Hi Gerd,
> 
> These patches are a great idea but I don't know if we can take GPLv2 
> code like that. Are they even mergeable into the main edk2 repo (as 
> it's not compatible with BSD-2-clause)?

It's build system, doesn't end up being linked into firmware code, so not sure license compatibility is actually a problem here.

In any case I strongly prefer to fix that in some automatic way which does *not* require a new GCC12 tool chain definition.

So, any comments how to move forward with this?
Can we take the series as-is?
If not, other suggestions?
Second-best idea I've seen on the list is using 'gcc -dumpversion'.

Is it an option to just raise the minimum required gcc version to something newer?  gcc5 was released almost 7 years ago ...

take care,
  Gerd