[Planeshifter]

Resolves #{{TODO: add issue number}}.

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• upgrades the compiler installed by the Linux workflows (linux_test, linux_test_install, linux_test_cov, linux_examples, linux_benchmark, codeql) from gcc-9 to gcc-14 (g++, gfortran, and multilib variants included), with runners on ubuntu-latest.

Failing run: https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/actions/runs/42000096343 (also https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/actions/runs/42000431946).

Symptom: E: Unable to locate package gcc-9 (also g++-9, gfortran-9, and multilib variants) in the compiler install step.

Root cause: ubuntu-latest now resolves to Ubuntu 26.04, which does not provide the gcc-9 packages.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

None.

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Not validated in CI. Availability of gcc-14, gfortran-14, and the multilib packages on 26.04 is based on package listings, not a workflow run; if the install step fails, the version needs adjusting. .travis.yml is untouched.

Not addressed here: random_benchmarks (run 41939880051) failed on cgemv because complex/float32/base/assert/is-equal/manifest.json lacks a benchmark conf; macos_test failures were not diagnosed.

Checklist

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

• Yes

• No

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)

• Test/benchmark generation

• Documentation (including examples)

• Research and understanding

Disclosure

This PR was written by Claude Code as part of an automated CI triage routine.

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_017wWD77KjnKtfokLoXjLFGi

[kgryte]

Why not go ahead and upgrade our gcc toolchain in CI? Did you test this to see whether this was even possible?

[Planeshifter]

No, I did not test an upgrade. This PR is a stopgap that restores the previous environment (ubuntu-24.04, where gcc-9 is available); it has not been exercised in CI either, since the changed workflows are scheduled/workflow_run triggered.

An upgrade is likely feasible, but I have not verified it. It would mean changing the compiler install and the gcc/g++/gfortran symlinks in all six workflows to a version available on 26.04, and then confirming that the full Node.js matrix (including the old versions), the native addon builds, and the C lint/benchmark/examples jobs still pass with the newer compiler. That is a broader change with real regression risk, so I did not bundle it here.

If you want it, I can take that on as a separate change with a manual workflow_dispatch run to validate before merging. Let me know which gcc version you prefer.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[kgryte]

You should investigate the solution space before falling back to a stopgap, as doing so just increases technical debt which may never been repaid.

[Planeshifter]

Understood. I have not pushed anything further. What I could establish so far:

• gcc-9, g++-9, and gfortran-9 are hard-coded in the install and symlink steps of six workflows (codeql, linux_benchmark, linux_examples, linux_test, linux_test_cov, linux_test_install), and also appear in .travis.yml. An upgrade means changing all of those consistently.
• From this environment I cannot reach the ubuntu-toolchain-r/test PPA or run the workflows, so I cannot confirm which compiler versions are installable on 26.04 or that the native addon builds and the C lint/benchmark/examples jobs pass with a newer compiler. I do not want to push an untested toolchain change across all Linux CI.

I will flag this to the PR owner so the upgrade is done and validated (for example via workflow_dispatch) rather than guessed at here. If you would rather close this PR in favor of that change, that works for me.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[kgryte]

Can you not perform a normal web search to see what is installable on latest Ubuntu? This seems like a fixable problem.

[Planeshifter]

Pushed a revision that drops the ubuntu-24.04 pin and upgrades the compiler instead: gcc-9 → gcc-14 (plus g++, gfortran, and multilib variants) in the six workflows, with runners back on ubuntu-latest.

From a web search: Ubuntu 26.04 defaults to GCC 15 and carries older GCC versions, and a third-party builder reports gcc-14 being installed on it. I could not confirm gfortran-14 or the -multilib packages for resolute, and I have not run the workflows. The first scheduled/workflow_dispatch run of linux_test is the real check; if gfortran-14 or multilib is missing, the install step will fail immediately and will need adjusting (for example gcc-15).

I left .travis.yml untouched. I also did not change the PPA step, which still resolves on resolute.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[kgryte]

Go ahead and update the travis.yml configuration file.

[kgryte]

And are there any other places in the codebase where we hardcode the gcc version to v9?

[Planeshifter]

Updated .travis.yml: gcc-9 → gcc-14 (packages and before_install symlinks), matching the workflows. I also changed dist from xenial to noble, since I do not expect the ubuntu-toolchain-r-test source to provide a newer compiler for xenial. That dist change is my judgment call and is not validated on Travis; say if you would rather keep xenial or use a different dist.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[Planeshifter]

I searched the tracked files (excluding changelogs) for gcc/g++/gfortran with a version of 9, GCC 9, gcc >=9-style constraints, and toolchain references. Besides the six workflows and .travis.yml already in this PR, there are no other hardcoded v9 references. Not covered: untracked/external configuration (for example, repository or organization CI settings, or Docker images outside this repo).

Related but not version-specific: the six workflows still add ppa:ubuntu-toolchain-r/test and .travis.yml still lists the ubuntu-toolchain-r-test source. They may be unnecessary now that the packages come from the Ubuntu archive, but I left them as is since removing them is a separate change I cannot validate here. Let me know if you want them dropped in this PR.

---

Generated by Claude Code