Where can I obtain this specific gcc version

[unman]

That is why I compiled it instead and installed it as an additional version, which is eventually not the one asked for.
If something is wrong with the procedure I took, please let me know.

The obvious thing that is wrong is that you have compiled from source
but you have not set the version name to the one that you want.
You should look at the --with-pkgversion configuration option.

But why are you doing this?
You can use the power of Qubes to install a template that will allow you
to install and use the native package (and now you know exactly what that
package is, and what Fedora version to use). This has the advantage
that you will be building on the same platform where you want to use
the modules, and you’ll avoid any version conflicts.

I never presume to speak for the Qubes team. When I comment in the Forum or in the mailing lists I speak for myself.

[enmus]

@unman

You should look at the --with-pkgversion configuration option.

I tried with

--with-pkgversion='10.3.1 20210422 (Red Hat 10.3.1-1)'

only compiling to fail with:

configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables

for the first time ever, and the only thing I changed in a procedure was adding that flag.

I gave up.

I just think packages like gcc version above, used to build Qubes OS should be available in qubes repos. It’s not that hard to collect them at the time of building Qubes and to offer them to the users who will try in 7-10 years to build something, between fedora-3x and fedora 4x version on which two versions Qubes OS’s dom0 is/will be based on. Trivial.

@unman

You can use the power of Qubes to install a template that will allow you
to install and use the native package (and now you know exactly what that
package is, and what Fedora version to use).

I don’t think I am power enough to follow this, but if you mean by this to use native kernel in a template VM, I am aware of that on the other topic.

But - if I rely on Qubes, I want to rely on each part of it. For example, dkms in a template to work with the kernel provided by dom0. So, this is what I expect - developing Qubes to work with this, not to rely on distro kernels. I didn’t choose Qubes for that.

@unman

This has the advantage
that you will be building on the same platform where you want to use
the modules, and you’ll avoid any version conflicts.

I want to build on the same platform where I want to use modules - in a kernel provided by Qubes devs.

So, do the devs think it is not important enough dkms to work in their kernels?

[unman]

I just think packages like gcc version above, used to build Qubes OS should be available in qubes repos. It’s not that hard to collect them at the time of building Qubes and to offer them to the users who will try in 7-10 years to build something, between fedora-3x and fedora 4x version on which two versions Qubes OS’s dom0 is/will be based on. Trivial.

The packages are available, as I have explained to you.
Why would Qubes provide them when they are available from the source,
in this case Fedora.

But - if I rely on Qubes, I want to rely on each part of it. For example, dkms in a template to work with the kernel provided by dom0. So, this is what I expect - developing Qubes to work with this, not to rely on distro kernels. I didn’t choose Qubes for that.

I do not understand you.
You rely on Fedora for many things in Qubes.

So, do the devs think it is not important enough dkms to work in their kernels?

I do not understand. dkms will work with Qubes provided kernels. I
also have dkms working with native kernels.
You should not extrapolate from your own failure to get this working,
particularly when you have seemed to ignore advice given.

I never presume to speak for the Qubes team. When I comment in the Forum or in the mailing lists I speak for myself.

[enmus]

@unman

dkms will work with Qubes provided kernels.

How? I’m still waiting for that answer, obviously no one wanted to provide me with…

[enmus]

@unman

You should not extrapolate from your own failure to get this working,

You shouldn’t extrapolate that it works because it’s only me who’s reporting it doesn’t work.

[enmus]

@unman

particularly when you have seemed to ignore advice given.

You already asked me if I followed your thoughts. I have already answered that I did to the extent I was able to. Beside ignorance is different than ignoring, I am sure that you are aware that you are not easy to follow (unlike @rustybird for example). I’m not talking about knowledge here, but about the ability/will to transfer it.

[unman]

How? I’m still waiting for that answer, obviously no one wanted to provide me with…

I believe you have linked to a GitHub issue which was closed because the
user was able to use dkms on all kernels from current-testing.
I’m not sure what your point is.

[unman]

You already asked me if I followed your thoughts. I have already answered that I did to the extent I was able to. Beside ignorance is different than ignoring, I am sure that you are aware that you are not easy to follow (unlike @rustybird for example). I’m not talking about knowledge here, but about the ability/will to transfer it.

Hmm. If I am asking for help it does not look like a smart move to be rude
to someone who is trying to help.

The issue you have is not Qubes specific.
In Qubes, it should be easy for you to get the specific gcc version
you want, and I have tried to help you do this.
I tried to help you build your own gcc with the description you wanted,
but you were not able to do this.
In various sources, you can see workarounds for dealing with version
mismatches - you don’t say if you have tried these.

I have a feeling that you need to step back and make sure that you are
asking the right question. (XY problem)

I have little time free, and for various reasons it is difficult for me
to send detailed instructions or handhold users. I do what I can.
Also, of course, you are a novice, and these matters are only available
to Knights of St Andrew, or those of a higher degree.

I never presume to speak for the Qubes team. When I comment in the Forum or in the mailing lists I speak for myself.

[enmus]

If I was to suggest one thing, that would be a lesser use of epithets and verbs which lead to labeling people. Emphasizing that someone is “confused”, “ignoring”, “not thinking”, “novice”, “lesser degree”, and many other doesn’t help establishing friendly environment. On the contrary, it might make a sense of passive aggressiveness. I don’t see such an attitude from other “Knights of St Qubes”.

Thanks for your time. I agree it’s often wasted here.

[unman]

Thanks for your time. I agree it’s often wasted here.

Some changes to my Kill File should help reduce that wasted time.