|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > July 2004 > Depending on another package's source
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Depending on another package's source
|
|
| Wesley J Landaker 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| | |
| Andrew Suffield 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 03:16:50PM -0600, Wesley J Landaker wrote:
> GHDL is a VHDL compiler that's implemented as a stand-alone language
> target for GCC. The way it's typically compiled is by:
>
> 1) Unpacking the latest GCC sources -- only gcc-core is necessary.
> 2) Unpacking GHDL on top (adds 'vhdl' directory, no other modifications)
> 3) Compile GCC with --enable-languages=vhdl
This is a lunatic approach for an upstream to take. Granted that
branching gcc is excruciatingly difficult - but distributing partial
source really does suck.
> For packaging this I thought of several different scenerios:
>
> A) Include the source of gcc-core in the .orig.tar.gz
> Pro: it's the only way I've thought of yet
> Pro: immunity to [hypothetical] changes in new versions GCC
> Con: it duplicates some of what's in the gcc source package
That's about the best you're going to get. You have to undo the lunacy
by fixing a specific version of the gcc source anyway.
> B) Somehow "build-depend" on the gcc source package
> Pro: no duplication of source code
> Con: it could [hypothetically] break on a new version of GCC
> Con: I don't think you can really do this
You can't. Also, it would break randomly as the gcc source package
changes.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
| |
| Florian Weimer 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| * Andrew Suffield:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 03:16:50PM -0600, Wesley J Landaker wrote:
>
> This is a lunatic approach for an upstream to take. Granted that
> branching gcc is excruciatingly difficult - but distributing partial
> source really does suck.
It's quite common in GCC-land, and I really don't see what's so wrong
with it. 8-)
>
> That's about the best you're going to get. You have to undo the lunacy
> by fixing a specific version of the gcc source anyway.
Yes, I agree that's the way to go.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 10:42:37PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 03:16:50PM -0600, Wesley J Landaker wrote:
>
> You can't. Also, it would break randomly as the gcc source package
> changes.
In this specific case:
apt-cache show toolchain-source
(I've seen this before with other packages, although I don't recall
which ones. It seems to me that this is the most reasonable approach)
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
WATER
-- with thanks to fortune
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wesley J Landaker 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| | |
| Wesley J Landaker 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| | |
| Wesley J Landaker 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| | |
| Andrew Suffield 2004-07-31, 5:52 pm |
| On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 11:45:14PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield:
>
>
> It's quite common in GCC-land, and I really don't see what's so wrong
> with it. 8-)
I didn't say it was uncommon, I said it was insane :P
You get to spend ages juggling minor revisions of gcc and components,
in the search of a combination that actually works. Upstream is
essentially failing to perform any release management.
It's notably common for gcc because so many research projects do this
- and research projects notoriously perform no release management, but
rather just release proof-of-concept code. Unfortunately people have a
habit of copying this behaviour even when it's completely inappropriate.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
|
|
|
|
|