Re: GPS plug-ins
Ludovic Brenta <email@example.com> writes:
> Stephen Leake writes:
>> The next upstream AUnit version (3.1.1) comes with a GPS plug-in file
>> It gives the path to the AUnit manual aunit.html.
>> The path is wrong for Debian; it's currently 'share/doc/aunit'; it needs
>> to be '/usr/share/doc/libaunit1-dev'. Actually, I'm not clear it needs
>> the leading '/usr'.
>> This plug-in file needs to be installed in the GPS plug-in directory
>> However, the GPS package already has a file 'aunit.xml' there, that is
>> wrong. It also has a 'gprbuild_gps.xml', which tries to point to
>> gprbuild documentation, and gets it wrong.
>> So I think we need a section in the Debian Ada policy on GPS plug-ins.
>> I propose that GPS _not_ own the plug-in files (except for those that
>> support stuff actually provided by GPS); the libaunit package should own
>> aunit.xml, gprbuild should own its xml file.
>> In addition, we might as well state explictly where the GPS plug-in
>> directory is, and that the plug-in document link should point to the
>> standard Debian documentation location.
>> One alternative would be to file bugs against GPS for the plug-in files;
>> I think it's cleaner to have the plug-ins install everything. That way
>> someone can build a new plug-in without requiring a new GPS upload.
>> Note that the document path contains the aliversion, so a new version of
>> an Ada package can require a new plug-in file.
> I agree with everything you said in principle. In fact a couple of
> packages already provide GPS plug-ins that are not owned by the package
> gnat-gps (i.e. adacontrol, adabrowse).
> However, gnat-gps does *not* provide /usr/share/gps/plug-ins/aunit.xml
> and neither does libaunit1-dev; if you see such a file, what does "dpkg
> -S /usr/share/gps/plug-ins/aunit.xml" say?
"not found". The date on the file, and the permissions, indicate it was
installed separately; perhaps by the GNAT-2009 package.
Ah; and the gprbuild file is owned by the gprbuild package. I just
didn't patch it yet. Sigh.
> A section in the Debian Policy for Ada about GPS plug-ins is a good idea
> but it would be quite minimal: list the directory containing plug-ins
> and that's pretty much all; the general Debian Policy already forbids
> file conflicts. I think that deciding which plug-ins should be provided
> by gnat-gps and which should be provided by other packages should be
> done on a case-by-case basis.
Ok, I'll work on adding a paragraph.