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

Re: RFS: pict



Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 03:00:07PM +0100, Matej Kosik wrote:
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pict".
> 
> Have you read the OCaml packaging policy available in
> /usr/share/doc/ocaml/ocaml_packaging_policy.txt.gz (ocaml package)?
> Being a program implemented in OCaml it should obey to it.

Report on comformance of Pict to
http://pkg-ocaml-maint.alioth.debian.org/ocaml_packaging_policy.html/index.html

1.1. Bytecode and Native Code

Although some (important) parts of this software are written in OCaml
(namely the Pict compiler in the `Pict' directory of the provided source
code) here are also other components that must be distributed and
installed too and they were not written in OCaml
* some (the Pict runtime) are written in C
  (see the `Runtime' directory)
  This is compiled into native code and linked
  with compiled Pict programs
* some (the Pict libraries) are written in Pict, they are compiled
  with the Pict compiler into native code and linked with
  Pict programs

Since not all parts that must be distributed and are essential can be
provided as OCaml bytecode, I think that the architecture of this
package cannot be changed from `any' to `all'. Then I think it is safe
to privde also the Pict compiler compiled to native code.

Was my conclusion correct?

Another question:

Is there a way how could I try to compile this package for all
architectures and see if everything works? I must admit, I am working on
i386-compatible and the binaries I have created are also for this
architecture. I think it would be too bold to say `any' if I have
actually only tried `i386'. How do others try their packages on "other
architectures" that whose instances they physically own?

> 
> I'm Cc-ing the debian-ocaml-maint mailing list (the contact point for
> all maintainers of OCaml-related programs). People there (are supposed
> to :-)) have good knowledge of OCaml packaging issues and you can be
> probably more lucky in finding there a sponsor.
> 
> Thanks for packaging pict! (which I guess is the same thing as "nomadic
> pict", am I wrong?)
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> PS fully quoting your post for the benefits of debian-ocaml-maint
> readers
> 
>> * Package name: pict
>> * Version: 4.1.0-1
>> * Upstream Authors: Benjamin C. Pierce <pierce AT cs.indiana.edu>
>>                     David N. Turner
>> * URL:
>> http://altair.dcs.elf.stuba.sk/~kosik/debian/pool/main/p/pict/pict_4.1.0-1.dsc
>> * Description: Compiler of the Pict programming language
>>  Pict is a programming language in the ML tradition,
>>  formed by adding high-level derived forms and powerful
>>  static type system to a tiny core language. The core,
>>  Milner's pi-calculus, is becoming popular as a theoretical
>>  foundation for a broad class of concurrent applications.
>>  The goal in Pict is to identify and support idioms that
>>  arise naturally when these primitives are used to build
>>  working programs---idioms such as basic data structures,
>>  protocols for returning results, higher-order programming,
>>  selective communication, and concurrent objects. The type
>>  system integrates a number of features found in recent work
>>  on theoretical foundations for typed object-oriented languages:
>>  higher-order polymorphism, simple recursive data-types, subtyping,
>>  and a useful partial type inference algorithm.
>>
>>
>> The package is lintian clean.
>>
>> The package is not linda clean
>> E: pict; Binary /usr/lib/pict/pict contains unneeded section comment.
>> E: pict; Binary /usr/lib/pict/src2pi contains unneeded section comment.
>> E: pict; Binary /usr/lib/pict/src2tex contains unneeded section comment.
>> E: pict; Binary /usr/lib/pict/pict is not stripped.
>> E: pict; Binary /usr/lib/pict/src2pi is not stripped.
>> E: pict; Binary /usr/lib/pict/src2tex is not stripped.
>> because
>> #256900: ocaml: Ocaml compiled programs cannot be stripped, hence either
>> don't work or violate policy
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=256900
>>
>> It is possible to build the package in the pbuilder environment.
>>
>> Although the software exists already for some time, it was not yet
>> packaged for Debian.
> 

Regards
-- 
Matej Kosik

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: