Prev: AWS install problems
Next: GCC conflict on Ubuntu for mixed Ada/C++ project
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov on 17 May 2010 05:28
On Mon, 17 May 2010 00:05:39 +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote:

> Or that each -dev package for an Ada library should provide an
> individual project file for each C library referenced? That seems like
> a *lot* of work.

Not really, I did it for GtkAda manually. But it is possible to write a
simple script. The only problem is that many libraries use "-" and "." in
the library name. The script could replace them with "_" in the project
name.

>> project LIBRARY is
>> type Library_Kind_Type is ("static", "relocatable");
>> Library_Kind : Library_Kind_Type :=
>> external ("Library_Type", "relocatable");
>> for Library_Kind use Library_Kind;
>> for Library_Name use "LIBRARY"; -- Valid for either choice
>> for Library_Dir use "/usr/lib"; -- Valid for either choice
>> ...
>> for Externally_Built use "true";
>> end LIBRARY;
>
> That's a nice suggestion. I'll try to implement that for the release
> after Squeeze.

BTW, is it possible to have one united Ada policy for all Linux
distributions?

Linux Ada community is small, all people are known. Can't we use this as an
advantage here?

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
From: Ludovic Brenta on 17 May 2010 06:02
Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote on comp.lang.ada:
> On Mon, 17 May 2010 00:05:39 +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> > Or that each -dev package for an Ada library should provide an
> > individual project file for each C library referenced?  That seems like
> > a *lot* of work.
>
> Not really, I did it for GtkAda manually. But it is possible to write a
> simple script. The only problem is that many libraries use "-" and "." in
> the library name. The script could replace them with "_" in the project
> name.

GtkAda is particularly difficult. From one release to the next, the
result of /usr/bin/gtk-config (or is it pkg-config?) can, and does,
change. To implement your suggestion, the script would have to use
that as the input.

--
Ludovic Brenta.
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov on 17 May 2010 09:14
On Mon, 17 May 2010 03:02:16 -0700 (PDT), Ludovic Brenta wrote:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote on comp.lang.ada:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2010 00:05:39 +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>>> Or that each -dev package for an Ada library should provide an
>>> individual project file for each C library referenced? �That seems like
>>> a *lot* of work.
>>
>> Not really, I did it for GtkAda manually. But it is possible to write a
>> simple script. The only problem is that many libraries use "-" and "." in
>> the library name. The script could replace them with "_" in the project
>> name.
>
> GtkAda is particularly difficult. From one release to the next, the
> result of /usr/bin/gtk-config (or is it pkg-config?) can, and does,
> change. To implement your suggestion, the script would have to use
> that as the input.

I don't think that were a problem. The libraries GtkAda uses are ones of
Gtk (Glib, Gdk, Pango and other mess). They do not come and go. We need to
enumerate them once. (Of course when Gtk3 comes, we will have to do it
again, but that will be a big change anyway)

The real problem, as I see it, that the package names are different across
different distributions. Starting with gnat itself. It is gcc-gnat under
Fedora and gnat under Debian. We should at least stop this schism for Ada
packages.

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
From: Stephen Leake on 18 May 2010 04:00
"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox(a)dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> BTW, is it possible to have one united Ada policy for all Linux
> distributions?

First you have to enumerate "all Linux distributions"; I don't know how
to do that.

> Linux Ada community is small, all people are known.

Known to whom? Where do I find that list of people?

> Can't we use this as an advantage here?

It might be possible, if we can get everyone together.

Certainly Linux distributions that are derived from Debian should simply
use the Debian Ada policy.

We could define "Linux Ada community" as "people who respond to this
post"; that is at least a practical working definition. I doubt it
matches reality.

--
-- Stephe
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov on 18 May 2010 04:39
On Tue, 18 May 2010 04:00:40 -0400, Stephen Leake wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox(a)dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
>
>> BTW, is it possible to have one united Ada policy for all Linux
>> distributions?
>
> First you have to enumerate "all Linux distributions"; I don't know how
> to do that.

That's simple: all distributions having GNAT on the list. (In effect GNAT
is the only Linux Ada compiler)

>> Linux Ada community is small, all people are known.
>
> Known to whom?

to anybody reading c.l.a?

>> Can't we use this as an advantage here?
>
> It might be possible, if we can get everyone together.
>
> Certainly Linux distributions that are derived from Debian should simply
> use the Debian Ada policy.
>
> We could define "Linux Ada community" as "people who respond to this
> post"; that is at least a practical working definition. I doubt it
> matches reality.

[Wondering] Is it possible that there exist GNAT distribution maintainers,
who do not read c.l.a? They must be experienced Ada programmers in order to
be able to do that job. There is not that many other Ada resources on the
Web. I would be happy if there were a conspiracy for Ada, driven by some
top secret agents, but a more realistic hypothesis is that "we" indeed know
these people.

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: AWS install problems
Next: GCC conflict on Ubuntu for mixed Ada/C++ project