Bug#883702: RFS: lina/5.3.0-1 ( #859130 ITP: lina -- iso-compliant Forth interpreter and compiler )
Geert Stappers schreef op 2017-12-22 10:18:
Control: owner -1 !
<SNIP>
Also, is this the real source (AKA, "preferred form for
modification")?
Assembler is a valid language, generated assembler (nor generated
shell,
generated C, ...) is not. Some parts say about a configuration
process
that, as it seems to me, expands variables for a particular platform.
<snippet from="ci86.lina.fas of the lina.orig.tar.gz at
mentors.debian.net">
; If this is a configured assembly file, it should be accompanied with
configured
; documentation (texinfo, ps, html.)
; WITHOUT THE DOCUMENTATION: GIVE UP! GET THE REAL THING!
; You have a configured system, if there are NO curly brackets on the
next line.
;
;
; Configuration of this particular version:
; 32-bits protected mode
; running under Linux ; with native forth I/O
</snippet>
So yes, I have the feeling that I'm dealing with generated assembly.
The .orig.tar.gz does have ci86.lina.fas
I wonder what generated it and from what.
@Albert: Would you please elaborate?
I appreciate and understand what "prefered form of modification is".
I also understand that Debian must thread carefully here, and not accept
packages that bend the rules. This package certainly doesn't not go
against
the spirit of the rules and may only superficially seem not to
obey the letter of the law.
This has been discussed already to some extent.
There is a choice of assemblers . I've a kind of generic assembler code,
(that is not assembler code that could be assembled by any assembler)
and then an m4 script that transforms it to either fasm, .s nasm or even
tasm or
masm format.
This is *not* generated assembler. The assembler is a genuine source.
There is only
a limited processing between equivalent forms, to present a readable and
modifiable source to some one inclined to modify lina.
There is a one to one correspondance between a line with an assembler
instruction
in lina.fas lina.s lina.asm lina.nasm and the preconfiguration system,
and they
all correspond to the same binary code.
The base system also contains code for MS-windows and MSDOS
or even stand alone. This is removed by m4 to present a proper Linux
source. Nothing is gained by drawing all this linux foreign code into
a Debian package, merely to remove it. The more so as this system is
available and GPL-ed in its own right to be used by anybody
interested in e.g. an UEFI system booting directly into Forth.
Likewise there is also base documentation with an m4 provision to remove
all the MS
related documentation for a Linux texinfo file. I wanted to avoid the
situation with the gnu assembler where almost all options are irrelevant
for the processor one is
currently working with.
So in short it is a matter of configuration and selection, not
generation.
<SNIP>
Groeten
Geert Stappers
Groetjes Albert
--
Suffering is the prerogative of the strong, the weak -- perish.
Albert van der Horst
Reply to: