Re: GNAT 3.15p
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic.brenta@insalien.org> writes:
>
> > First, please note that Debian is the only distro that does not ship
> > shared libraries with the FSF variant of GNAT; all other distros agree
> > that shared libraries are a good thing.
>
> In fact, the GNU Ada Environment specification I wrote strongly
> recommends them, even with the sonames you prefer. 8-)
It's funny you should mention it just now, because I just became aware
of it not 10 minutes ago while browsing debian-devel archives :)
(however, it does not specifically mention sonames, just file names of
shared libraries).
Because I would strongly support any standardisation effort, I changed
the paths to the files for asis, which I'm packaging just now. I
don't like the long directory names too much (I would prefer just
/usr/include/<module> and /usr/lib/<module>), but I'll follow these
recommendations for compatibility with the Ada for Linux team. I used
to use their RPMs long ago.
I note that your recommendation includes the commands "adainstall" and
"adaconfig". I seem to remember them from the gnat RPM by Jürgen
Pfeifer. Are you planning to package them for Debian?
> > Most of the recent distributions seem to have dropped ACT releases
> > altogether, in favour of FSF ones. This is unfortunate, because the
> > ACT releases are more mature and stable. I would like Debian to
> > include GNAT 3.15p.
>
> Yes, that's a good idea.
>
> > The soname for FSF versions is also ill-chosen, and is very likely to
> > change when ACT finally declares the integration between the Ada
> > front-end and the GCC 3.x back-end to be complete. GCC 3.2 does not
> > have a problem, but GCC 3.3 uses the same soname as ACT's binary
> > distribution. This is bad, given the ABI incompatibility.
>
> I merely suspect that there is an ABI incompatibility. I'm not sure
> it's actually there. (No one tests such things.)
>
> > In order to ensure that the soname used by ACT and FSF variants remain
> > different, I think the best is to keep the current scheme for the
> > soname (libgnat-3.15p.so.1), and to add a prominent warning to this
> > effect in the description of the package. This has the additional
> > advantage of sticking to the Debian policy.
>
> I agree.
Thanks for your support. You can check out gnat (= 3.15p-2) which
follows this.
--
Ludovic Brenta.
Reply to: