Given these constraints, seems like a GNUStep-maintained apt repository is the answer, right? If you want the GCC packages, you can get them from Debian. If you want libobjc2/clang packages, you install the GNUStep apt repository.
I remember seeing the idea of an apt repository discussed awhile back. Is that still in the works? It would make deploying apps in my company a bit easier. I’ve got a script that clones all the code from github and compiles everything, but that does take a bit and would be nice for updates to be pushed out via apt. > > On Dec 28, 2021, at 5:13 PM, Yavor Doganov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:54:32 +0200, > Ivan Vučica wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 9:34 AM Andreas Fink <[email protected]> wrote: >>> packages in Debian are quite old >> >> Inaccurate. > > It is both accurate and inaccurate. More precisely, at times it is > accurate and at times it is inaccurate; it also depends what Debian > release you use for comparison. It is inevitable that a stable > release at some point starts qualifiying as one one with "old" or even > "quite old" packages, even with best of our effort. > >> At release times, I usually try to coordinate with Debian packagers. >> This time, it took a bit longer, but uploads happened in November and >> December. > > This is my personal fault; I failed to coordinate with you and inform > in advance about Debian's release schedule so the current GNUstep core > releases happened at a time we couldn't include them in the current > Debian stable release (bullseye). Then I was waiting for my sponsor > for more than 6 months for the upload of gnustep-make and subsequently > current GNUstep releases were introduced in Debian unstable with a > great delay. > >>> and don't support objc2.0. >> >> The issue here is Debian preferring to build things with GCC over >> Clang. > > I'm quite certain that I've explained at least once in great detail > why this is so, on this list. As there are still questions popping up > here and there, I intend to write a specific chapter regarding this > subject in the not-yet-finished Debian GNUstep team policy document. > It will be installable as a Debian package and the repository will be > public, like almost everything in Debian. > >> If we can convince the (very kind in their efforts) maintainers of >> the packaging to try to package with Clang and libobjc2, we'd be >> golden. > > The thing is, Debian is no longer a distro where a member of the > project can upload its pet package and keep it under custody until he > is formally declared maintainer. Packages are being aggressively > removed nowadays, on the grounds of being obsolete, unpopular, > unmaintained, or with unresponsive upstream. We fought hard with the > Debian stweards some 15 years ago for GNUstep to remain and I foresee > more battles on the horizon. > > The automatic reaction of these people is to "get rid" and that's > natural. From a Debian ftpmaster POV, a change which requires plenty > of manual action + coordination between teams and does not bring any > real benefit to the current packages is a poor change. > >> I believe Yavor and Gurkan are subscribed to (some of) GNUstep >> mailing lists. > > FWIW, I'm reading all GNUstep lists + (Savannah) bug traffic + > (GitHub) commit notifications + GAP + (not sure) gnustep-nonfsf. I'm > only subscribed to some of them though, the bulk of it I follow via > Usenet (Gmane), sometimes with delay. > >
