[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Some important packages have been orphaned

On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 10:23:44AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> No indication seems to be made as to why the packages are orphaned.
> For instance is it due to lack of time? Lack of interest? Or
> that gnat-3.1 is now out?

I understood this as a lack of interest in Debian, according to
some of his posts to -private. I think that this has nothing to
do with packages themselves.

> Actually, I am a bit disappointed with Ada support in Debian at the
> moment (although this may not be Debian's fault), gnat is broken and
> miscompiles correct code (1 problem has a work around, the other
> doesn't), gnat-3.1 is also broken and miscompiles correct code (1
> problem has a yucky work around, the other problem is the same one with
> no work around for gnat), and gdb hasn't had Ada support for ages.

GNAT is maintained by ACT, and this company gives a priority to its
customers so most of the bugs that were found in the public
release have probably already been fixed.

Now that the way of handling public releases has changed, I still
don't know how it is going to happen, i.e. what will be the
frequency of CVS commits for bugfixes. AFAIK, Laurent Guerby is
working on setting up ACATS tests. Many questions.

They're preparing a patch for gdb in order to make gnat 3.1 programs
being debuggable with it.

> I have filed bugs reports both in Debian (gnat and gnat-3.1) and
> upstream (gnat-3.1), but so far no response from upstream. I did get
> a response from the Debian maintainers, but they can't be expected to
> solve upstream's problems.
I think the gcc ML is now the place for reporting bugs, you already know

> If these problems get fixed in the future, I will consider taking over
> the relevant packages. Until then though, I will use gnat-3.1 and try to
> avoid using other Ada packages that trigger the bugs I have seen.

Why not maintaining those packages in team, via CVS like the way it is
done currently with gcc and glibc.
In my opinion, this would increase quality of packages, avoiding them
to be unmaintained for some time.

Raphaël Hertzog was working on getting a Debian machine for this
purpose. What's the status of this task Raphaël?



Jérôme Marant

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: