Wow, thanks Dirk for bringing this up, but no thatnks for rushing - I haven't got my prototype ebuilds and eclass workign yet :). Well, I did somewhat, but not to the point where it would really, um, work..
Anyway, since this was brought up, I think I would do that -dev posting, to announce proposed changes and clarify the issue. See, not only gcc is a mess, the situation with gnat, while technically somewhat more "stable", is messier "organizationally". In short, there are two communities now that develop ada (gcc-related) and three relevant compilers. First (organization) is Ada Core - they do the development and most new features, they are involved with the Ada standard (Ada 200x - the standard, is almost out BTW and most of the new features are already "done") and also they do commercial support. They are a commercial company, a lot tike Trolltech, with a slightly different licensing model from what I can tell. They issue two compilers: gnatpro - a commercial "alternative" which you can use to sell software or do non-OS/academia development and gnatgpl - essentially the same, but all GPL and released with some delay. And no support, except by public forums/lists of course.. Now, these two are supposed to share 99% of the code, so, theoretically, one package could deal with both. Unfortunately looks like that 1% difference is in legal land and not just some license bundled with the rest of it. The license clause is in the code and in pretty much every distributed spec file (analog of headers for C[++] distributed with compiler, for the rts system, etc.). So I am not sure we can simply use one ebuild with LICENSE="blah | blah". Although gnatgpl-2005 is not out yet, so we'll have to see it for real, when it is released. Now, nice folks at gcc have picked it up recently as well (and they seem to be consistently active nowadays). They are mostly making it play nicely with the mainstream gcc (Ada Core's stuff is built vs fixed gcc version, quite far behind normally) and porting to other arches. This one is different enough technically to warrant separate ebuild, plus trying to stick all three together would make versioning insane (it is almost that now with a single gnat package (and gnatpro-3.15, gnatgcc-3.4x in..) and I don't want to think how we would agg the Ada Core's 2005 stuff in). Keep in mind, I am not closely involved in either of these communities, so if somebody has any clarifications to these clarifications, just shoot them :). So, the idea was to split gnat into three packages (gnatpro although would have to wait untill we sort it all out, make gnatgpl work and contact Ada Core..) plus an eclass "tu rule them all". In addition to following the logic of upstream this will give you the ability to install them in parallel, plus they will be SLOTted, to allow verrsions based on different backends to coexist.. Looks like that will have to be done via an extra eclass - gnatbuild, in addition to the gnat.eclass we have now. The gnatbuild will keep common functionality for building all the gnats and gnat.eclass is necessary for building ada packages (there is some shared code for them, mostly filtering flags and setting env). Plus the eselect module, to set the active compiler. Now, back to the topic at hand. gnatgcc (the proposed name for the compiler that's in gcc, maintained by FSF) *may be* joined with the rest of gcc, starting with gcc-4.0 or gcc-4.1 for example. It also *may be* kept separate. I would really like here to hear some opinions, as I heard users requesting it both ways.. Does anybody know if there is there is some "generic" Ada users hangout as well? I think it would be usefull to post something similar there, when I make it all work.. For more details please refer to #111340 and #64373. Last, but not least: we need a long-term maintainer of ada stuff to help me and David Holm. I am really sidetracking now from the rest of Scientific Gentoo and Ezotheric Gentoo stuff that I do, so I would like to hand this over to somebody when I finish with this reorganization and make it work.. So, if there is anybody motivated enough to look over Ada in Gentoo, please follow the normal routine: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=1&chap=2 email recruiters, CC me or ada herd.. (Above that was apparently a call to users, if there is an interesetd in Ada dev, so much the better :)). George середа, 4. січень 2006 08:47, Dirk Heinrichs Ви написали: > Hi, > > there has been a lengthy discussion on bugzilla ([1]), about the best > packaging method for the gnat Ada compiler. The outcome seems to be that > gnat will still have its own ebuild in the future and not be part of the > GCC ebuild. It also has a mention that gcj will eventually be split out > from the GCC ebuild in the future. > > So my question is: Would it be a good idea to generally turn GCC into split > ebuilds (like KDE/X.org)? Pros/Cons? > > Bye... -- [email protected] mailing list
