Re: New gcc-3.1 packages (including gnat)
Samuel Tardieu writes:
> | - should we build gnat from the gcc-3.1 source at all?
>
> Sure.
Then I add you to the maintainers list and you subscribe to
debian-gcc@lists.debian.org?
> | - package names: I choose gnat-3.15 and libgnat3.15a. Is this ok, or
> | should it be gnat-3.1?
>
> Mmm, at least until we are sure that this version of GNAT is as stable as
> the previous one, I would prefer a totally different name (the official
> release number will be GNAT 5.0 anyway).
>
> What about gcc-gnat-<date>?
No. this will be from the gcc-3.1 release.
> Or gcc-gnat-3.1? If everything gets OK, no
> problem for moving to your package.
Then again, why not gnat-3.15? Or gnat-3.1? And how about naming the
binaries? Currently the are called <tool>-3.15. _But_ the build
process expects that the name gnatbind is available?
Is there a small package with Ada source packaged for Debian, which
can be used as a test case? Maybe not hello-world, but something with
more than one module.
> | - Do we want to have a versioned Ada package? If yes, the existing
> | Ada compiler has to be repackaged.
> |
> | - If we have versioned names, then we will need to provide the correct
> | gnatbind executable for the build process. Currently I only tested
> | with gnat-3.14.
> |
> | - The installation of gnat goes wrong. I had to explicitely call
> | the add-install.common target.
> |
> | - Sam, please could you update the relink script from gnat-3.14
> | for gnat-3.15? Currently all tools are linked statically.
>
> Unfortunately, I am fully booked for next week, then I leave for a 3 weeks
> vacation, then two crazy weeks and again one week of vacation. As a
> consequence, I will be totally unable to work on GNAT and unresponsive
> for the next 7 weeks at least.
well, it works, but uses more space. so it's not urgent.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: