Modula 3 thoughts
Rejected first time round by the spam filter...the things we go through for
Debian. :-)
I've had a poke around the Modula-3 sources, and have come to the conclusion
that it's not going to be packaged up overnight. Two reasons:
* The gcc backend is based on 2.6.3. 'Nuff said, I believe.
* m3gdb is based on 4.14, which (IIRC) doesn't properly support Linux ELF.
(I could be wrong, though...)
I've had a look at the diffs between m3cc and gcc 2.6.3 (thank God that Debian
0.93R6 only had 2.6.3 - that's where I got the 2.6.3 sources :), and it looks
fairly simple - I'll fiddle with 2.7.2.1 and see where that gets me. gdb is a
little less straightforward, but I view that as lower priority (I want the
compiler going first before I start fiddling with the debugger.)
Queries:
Should the m3 diffs be integrated into the "standard" gcc package? (I could
send them to the FSF, perhaps, for 2.8, but I'd want to speak with the good
people at Digital about that first.)
Similarly, should m3gdb's diffs go into the standard gdb package, or should
it be separate?
I have no qualms, looking at the copyright, about modula 3 going into the
distribution proper. The only problem is what to do about the sources (which
in the above cases are based upon GNU programs) - merge, or keep separate?
(The problem with m3cc can probably be bypassed - I understand there's a
separate compiler that does a better job than the gcc backend.)
Cheers.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: