Okay. Let's do this in a democratic fashion. We
can have a poll on JF's proposed approach to create
a gcc split-off among the fink developers who are
BuildDepends on the gcc4x packages in theirs. The
proposal is...
-------------------------------------------------
other pkgs : I gave you in my comment below the
example of gettext-bin _ a basic pkg, maintained
by fink-core ...
how to install: fink install gcc-4.X.Y
But the intent is clearly to accelerate
upgrading , in order for users an pkg submitters
not to stay stuck with museum-gcc's,
just because they forgot to check for the
presence of a new number, ending up in a
situation where about every pkg uses its
own version of gcc, for purely accidental
reasons.
The suggestion does have the slight disadvantage
that new pkgs, IF they want to depend on a
specific version of gcc (but no pkg takes such
precautions against upgrades of Apple's compilers),
have to Depend on gcc4X-compiler, and put
%p/lib/gcc4.X/bin first in PATH
But existing pkgs don't have to be modified
(provided the existing gcc4X pkgs are not refactored !),
assuming just that in your upcoming gcc-4.4.4 pkg
you add "gcc" itself to the Conflicts and Replaces.
This would still cause slight trouble with the pkgs still
depending on gcc42 or gcc43 , users having to manually
install that dep.. I'd think there are few such pkgs,
and that there are anyway probably reasons to upgrade
most of them.
But some seem to have reasons (dx, pdftk).
Probably it would be worth, for those 2 pkgs, to add also
to gcc42 and gcc43 a Conflicts/Replaces for "gcc"...
Hopefully very few users still need those old versions,
so few would have to re-compile ...
And the same thing would anyway have to be done
oterwise for the upcoming gcc-4.6 for those pkgs..
This is "biting the bullet" once; after this, no more trouble
ever of this sort.
Jean-Francois
----------------------------------------------------
If there is a consensus that the majority of fink developers (who
are the end-users) are okay with this and that I will
be protected from the flak when some users are forced
to build gcc42, gcc43, gcc44 and gcc45 after a
'fink selfupdate', I am willing to consider implementing
it. Opinions?
Jack
ps My main concern is that developers will have buyer's
remorse if they automate the BuildDepends on gcc such
that the newest FSF gcc is always used and they suddenly
discover package X is incompatible with the compiler
changes or tickles a bug in the compiler. Also, we will
have to propose some convention for patch replacement
such that a package that BuildDepends on gcc automatically
checks its version and sets LDFLAGS=-L%p/lib/gcc4.x/lib
based on the version returned. In short, this is not
a trivial undertakening and everyone will have to buy
in.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
