Improving Ada support on FreeBSD and in the ports system
in [Ports]
|
Prev: ports devel/pear
Next: RFC: svn for make fetch
From: freebsd-ports on 7 Nov 2009 16:29 [Apologies for the possible double-post, I mistyped the From: address] Hello. It's come to my attention that the FreeBSD ports system has very poor support for Ada and Ada software in general. A quick search on Freshports for 'Ada' shows the following packages: devel/adabooch - No dependencies registered! devel/adacurses - lang/gnat devel/adasdl - lang/gnat net/adasockets - lang/gnat (broken) textproc/xmlada - lang/gnat-gcc41 (broken) textproc/xmlada-gps - lang/gnat (broken) x11-toolkits/gtkada - lang/gnat (broken) x11-toolkits/gtkada-devel - lang/gnat (broken) x11-toolkits/gtkada-gcc - lang/gnat-gcc41 (broken) x11-toolkits/gtkada-gps - lang/gnat (broken) I'm aware there are more packages than this in the ports sytem. The situation doesn't get any better the more you read... The problems any user of Ada on FreeBSD faces are: PROBLEM 1. Lack of packages (as shown above) Of the 10 packages listed, only three of those (maybe two) actually work. PROBLEM 2. No choice in the use of compiler The Ada world is essentially divided between the GCC version of GNAT that can produce executables not tainted by the GPL (GNAT-FSF) and the GPL version (GNAT-GPL) from AdaCore which can't. Debian, for example, only uses GNAT-FSF (but one can, of course, just download GNAT-GPL from AdaCore and use it without issue). PROBLEM 3. Compiler version chaos and lack of architecture support We have: lang/gnat (GPL 2009 version, i386 only) lang/gnat-gcc41 (GCC 4.1, i386 only) lang/gnat-gcc42 (GCC 4.2, i386 only) lang/gnat-gcc43 (GCC 4.3, i386 only) lang/gnat-gcc44 (GCC 4.4, i386 and amd64) Apart from the fact that nobody using Ada knows which one of the above five ports they want, they'll also be forced into using at least one of them due to lack of architecture support and ports unconditionally depending on lang/gnat. Debian, for example, has a wide range of compiler architectures available for GNAT: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/gnat Anybody that wants to install Ada packages from ports on AMD64 is stuck. Despite having an AMD64 compiler (gnat-gcc44) in ports, packages will demand lang/gnat and will then fail due to ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=i386. PROBLEM 4. Lack of a debugger We currently only have gdb 6.1.1 in the base system and I've never been able to get any of the other gdb ports to compile (version >= 6.8 of gdb have explicit Ada support). PROBLEM 5. Lack of a consistent policy for Ada packages Debian, for example, has this: http://people.debian.org/~lbrenta/debian-ada-policy.html I would like to (attempt to) solve all of the above problems and make FreeBSD a serious platform for Ada development. I will attempt to address the five points above with possible solutions to each. PROBLEM 1. Lack of packages This is something I will work on personally. I have quite a large number of packages I have developed myself to be submitted to ports but have been unable until now due to the problems described above. I am also willing to spend time porting the "big name" packages such as GtkAda and AWS to FreeBSD (porting Ada programs tends to be quite painless, usually). PROBLEM 2. No choice in the use of compiler PROBLEM 3. Compiler version chaos and lack of architecture support I believe there needs to be a mechanism to select an Ada compiler for use with packages. I'm not sure what the Ports system currently provides for this case. I do not want to force a particular compiler choice on the users of packages. Some packages (currently) require GNAT GPL to function (any program using ASIS[1] currently needs an extra support library[2] to work with GNAT FSF). The setting should probably be a port option that can be set in make.conf. I would be interested to hear ideas on this. I would like to see the number of GNAT ports brought down to two - one for GNAT-FSF and one for GNAT-GPL. This would require input from the maintainers of the older gnat-gcc ports and a coordinated effort to make sure the small selection of packages available work with both of the resulting ports (before adding new packages). Lack of architecture support is a time-consuming issue. Both GCC and GNAT have support for a wide range of architectures but GNAT only has support for FreeBSD i386 (and now AMD64 in trunk). I have produced bootstrap binaries for GCC 4.4 on i386 and AMD64 on FreeBSD 7.2 (and will produce binaries for 8.0 when it arrives) but do not have access to any other architectures running FreeBSD. This is more or less an issue of manpower and patience. PROBLEM 4. Lack of a debugger This should not be a major problem to solve. Presumably the devel/cross-gdb port will be used with settings to compile a native debugger. I will submit PRs for the problems I've had (when the port could eventually be persuaded to compile, it seemed to believe it was not a native debugger and couldn't run executables). It might be worth updating the devel/gdb6 port or simply turning it into a slave port that compiles devel/cross-gdb with the correct settings for the current architecture. PROBLEM 5. Lack of a consistent policy for Ada I believe this'll occur naturally as a consequence of the above. I'm willing to document the policy myself. Comments, flames, welcome. Mark http://adacommons.org http://coreland.ath.cx irc://freenode.net/ada irc://freenode.net/adacommons [1] http://www.sigada.org/wg/asiswg/ [2] http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/libgnatvsn-dev
From: Mark Linimon on 7 Nov 2009 23:06 It's true that the Ada packages have suffered a fair amount of bit-rot in the past year or so. I'm happy to see someone stepping forward to work on them. On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 09:29:36PM +0000, freebsd-ports(a)coreland.ath.cx wrote: > PROBLEM 1. Lack of packages > > Of the 10 packages listed, only three of those (maybe two) actually > work. There were several more working, but a recent compiler update broke them. At that time the portmgr team went ahead and marked the ports "broken". That both advises users that they don't compile, and also triggers a periodic email to the ports@ mailing list. Beyond that we have to rely on work done by individual contributors. > PROBLEM 3. Compiler version chaos and lack of architecture support > > I believe there needs to be a mechanism to select an Ada compiler > for use with packages. I'm not sure what the Ports system currently > provides for this case. [...] The setting should probably be a > port option that can be set in make.conf. Most of the general mechanisms for selecting "port alternative foo vs. bar" live in ports/Mk. In particular, you will probably want to look at ports/Mk/bsd.gcc.mk. A more advanced example is in bsd.java.mk. Note: don't feel bad if you don't understand the contents of these files; they have evolved to their current state over quite some period of time. It's perfectly fair to ask for help. > Lack of architecture support is a time-consuming issue. Both GCC > and GNAT have support for a wide range of architectures but GNAT > only has support for FreeBSD i386 (and now AMD64 in trunk). I have > produced bootstrap binaries for GCC 4.4 on i386 and AMD64 on FreeBSD > 7.2 (and will produce binaries for 8.0 when it arrives) but do > not have access to any other architectures running FreeBSD. For something like this that isn't widely used, I wouldn't spend too much time on anything other than i386 and amd64. That's where the majority of our user base is (I'm guessing 80% and 15%, respectively, based on the PR arrival statistics.) I run the sparc64 package builds, and those machines have plenty of trouble keeping up with the things they're already asked to build :-) mcl _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Daniel Eischen on 8 Nov 2009 00:06 On Sat, 7 Nov 2009, freebsd-ports(a)coreland.ath.cx wrote: > [Apologies for the possible double-post, I mistyped the From: address] > > Hello. > > It's come to my attention that the FreeBSD ports system has very poor support > for Ada and Ada software in general. > > A quick search on Freshports for 'Ada' shows the following packages: > > devel/adabooch - No dependencies registered! > devel/adacurses - lang/gnat > devel/adasdl - lang/gnat > net/adasockets - lang/gnat (broken) > textproc/xmlada - lang/gnat-gcc41 (broken) > textproc/xmlada-gps - lang/gnat (broken) > x11-toolkits/gtkada - lang/gnat (broken) > x11-toolkits/gtkada-devel - lang/gnat (broken) > x11-toolkits/gtkada-gcc - lang/gnat-gcc41 (broken) > x11-toolkits/gtkada-gps - lang/gnat (broken) > > I'm aware there are more packages than this in the ports sytem. The situation > doesn't get any better the more you read... > > The problems any user of Ada on FreeBSD faces are: > > PROBLEM 1. Lack of packages (as shown above) > > Of the 10 packages listed, only three of those (maybe two) actually > work. The packages are way out of date and don't build with the newer GNAT's. Patches welcome. > PROBLEM 2. No choice in the use of compiler > > The Ada world is essentially divided between the GCC version of GNAT > that can produce executables not tainted by the GPL (GNAT-FSF) and the > GPL version (GNAT-GPL) from AdaCore which can't. > > Debian, for example, only uses GNAT-FSF (but one can, of course, > just download GNAT-GPL from AdaCore and use it without issue). > > PROBLEM 3. Compiler version chaos and lack of architecture support > > We have: > > lang/gnat (GPL 2009 version, i386 only) Patches for amd64 support are also welcome. I thought you were going to do a port for GNAT-gpl amd64? -- DE _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: freebsd-ports on 8 Nov 2009 15:16 'Lo, On 2009-11-08 00:06:16, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > The packages are way out of date and don't build with the newer > GNAT's. Patches welcome. Right! > > PROBLEM 3. Compiler version chaos and lack of architecture support > > > > We have: > > > > lang/gnat (GPL 2009 version, i386 only) > > Patches for amd64 support are also welcome. I thought you were > going to do a port for GNAT-gpl amd64? I am indeed. Just waiting for the gnat-gcc44 port to be committed, then I'll work on getting GPL 2009 compiling on amd64. M
From: freebsd-ports on 8 Nov 2009 15:18
On 2009-11-07 22:06:36, Mark Linimon wrote: > > There were several more working, but a recent compiler update broke them. > At that time the portmgr team went ahead and marked the ports "broken". > That both advises users that they don't compile, and also triggers a > periodic email to the ports@ mailing list. Beyond that we have to rely > on work done by individual contributors. Seems reasonable. > Most of the general mechanisms for selecting "port alternative foo vs. > bar" live in ports/Mk. In particular, you will probably want to look at > ports/Mk/bsd.gcc.mk. A more advanced example is in bsd.java.mk. Note: > don't feel bad if you don't understand the contents of these files; they > have evolved to their current state over quite some period of time. It's > perfectly fair to ask for help. It's on the list. Thanks! > For something like this that isn't widely used, I wouldn't spend too much > time on anything other than i386 and amd64. That's where the majority of > our user base is (I'm guessing 80% and 15%, respectively, based on the PR > arrival statistics.) That's good to know. I don't have any sparc64 machines laying around... M |