On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 01:33:51AM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 03 May 2010, at 21:04, Alexander Hansen wrote:
>
>> I think we're straying afield. We're not talking about BuildDepends:
>> gcc here. We're talking about (I believe):
>>
>> 1) Allowing multiple gccN-compiler packages to coexist, and maintain
>> their gccN-shlibs.
>> 2) Ordinarily packages will Depend: gcc4N and BuildDepend:
>> gcc4N-compiler (assuming that's where the headers reside--I'm a bit
>> hazy
>> on the final division here)
>> 3) A convenience package for _runtime_ use by packages that don't
>> build
>> against a gccN but simply _use_ one of its compilers (e.g. gfortran)
>> without caring what version it is, so that such packages didn't have
>> to
>> stipulate a particular gccN.
I don't see how you can possibly implement the third option without
it eventually getting misused. The idea of presenting the developers
with a gcc convenience package (for only packages like dragonegg-gcc
which use the FSF gcc at runtime) assumes that everyone will realize
that any other use will result in undefined dependencies on gcc-shlibs.
This seems likely to cause more confusion than it is worth. Also, in
the case of dragonegg-gcc it is useless because the dragonegg.so
compiler plugin must be built and used against a specific major version
of FSF gcc (>= 4.5).
Jack
>
> 4) A (just "convenience" ?) pkg for users who just want to run gfortran
> or whatever compiler on some routine, and don't want the hassle to
> have to find out the full path and/or exact prefixes/suffixes everytime.
>
> JF
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
