Re: Preliminary questions for sponsoring a compiler
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> Question 1: Am I obliged to supply a .s file and linking prescripts?
You need to supply the upstream source code and build system. If those
are the upstream source code and build system, then yes.
> (Because fasm is not in main)
fasm is in main:
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/fasm
> The problem is: ld is not stable w.r.t. linking pure assembler files.
That is a shame because fasm is limited to x86 architectures. If there
are alternative tools that can be used to build lina then that would
be a good idea.
> Or is it sufficient to supply .s and let the builder figure out
> how to make an executable? 1]
Our building is automatic and based on the upstream build system.
> I could supply an assembler file that can be build using the build-in
> assembler of lina. Does that count as "not require a package outside of main
> for compilation", the situation being about the same like the GNU
> c-compiler?
That counts as suitable for main, as long as it is not pre-built.
> If I got a sponsor, I need only supply an upstream package and the sponsor
> takes care of the rest? He will prompt me for any changes to be made in
> order to comply?
The Debian package maintainer takes the upstream code and build system
and wraps it such that the standard debian/rules targets are mapped to
upstream build system targets. Who the package maintainer is depends
on who has the interest, time and skills to create the packaging. Any
package maintainer should maintain a good relationship with upstream,
passing patches and bugs etc to them.
> Question 2: Are there any mentors that would even consider a compiler that
> is in competition with GCC, rather than a second generation compiler like
> Python Perl and the rest, that depend on GCC? Irrespective of merits?
> (On the upside, dear mentor, this will be some of the simplest packages you
> will ever encounter. ).
There are people who will sponsor any package that is suitable for
Debian. Finding someone to create the package in the first place is
harder than finding a sponsor at this point in time. The package
maintainer could be you though.
> Yes, I know there is an official GNU Forth compiler gforth. An important
> difference is that a package built with lina requires lina for
> building only, not for running. An alternative build with lina for e.g.
> ``factor'' 2] is as simple as the factor build in C, one executable, one
> man-page.
That seems like a reasonable reason to package lina.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: