Folks,
I have packaged GNAT 3.15p for Debian, and would like someone to
sponsor the package for me. The source package creates 2 binary
packages; gnat and libgnat-3.15p-1. The packages are signed with my
GPG key, which is in keys.debian.org (it has been signed by a Debian
Developer). The
Folks,
I have packaged GNAT 3.15p for Debian, and would like someone to
sponsor the package for me. The source package creates 2 binary
packages; gnat and libgnat-3.15p-1. The packages are signed with my
GPG key, which is in keys.debian.org (it has been signed by a Debian
Developer). The
Folks,
I have packaged ASIS for GNAT 3.15p for Debian. Unfortunately, I've
already filled my private web site with Ada stuff and so I cannot
upload ASIS to it.
If someone is interested, please reply and I'll send the .debs to you
for review. Here is the list of files:
7273
I forgot to say another thing about the "GNU Ada Environment
Specification".
While I can live with /usr/share/ada/adainclude and
/usr/lib/ada/adalib, I definitely disagree with putting the libraries
in /usr/lib/ada/adalib. The Debian Policy clearly states that both
static and shared libraries mu
gnat RPM by Jürgen
Pfeifer. Are you planning to package them for Debian?
> > Most of the recent distributions seem to have dropped ACT releases
> > altogether, in favour of FSF ones. This is unfortunate, because the
> > ACT releases are more mature and stable. I would like Deb
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
>> you really want to enable it by default?
>
> Well, yes, I would like to, especially since gnat 3.14p did, too.
Ah, let's keep the old mistakes. 8-)
> Could you shed some light on
wrote strongly
recommends them, even with the sonames you prefer. 8-)
> Most of the recent distributions seem to have dropped ACT releases
> altogether, in favour of FSF ones. This is unfortunate, because the
> ACT releases are more mature and stable. I would like Debian to
> include
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so this is not
> >> an option.
> >
> > I tried it on the binary distribution of GNAT 3.15p. I
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
> >> you really want to enable it by default?
> >
> > Well, yes, I would like to, especially since gnat 3.14p did, too.
>
> Ah, let
New on my web site (http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta):
* gnat-3.15p-2 takes into account Florian's remarks, except for the soname
of the shared libraries. I explained the reason for this in a previous
post.
* gnat-glade-3.15p-1, the distributed systems annex for GNAT.
* gnat-
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You should bump Standards-Version to the most recent one (after
>> checking that no changes are necessay).
>
> OK, will do. I was wondering where I could find a diff between
> various Standards-Versions
New on my web site (http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta):
* gnat-3.15p-2 takes into account Florian's remarks, except for the soname
of the shared libraries. I explained the reason for this in a previous
post.
* gnat-glade-3.15p-1, the distributed systems annex for GNAT.
* gnat-
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The real problem is the soname. I'm willing to change the soname to
> "libgnat-3.15p.so" (removing the .1) to become more compatible with
> ACT's GNAT, but does that violate the Debian Policy?
The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so this is not
> >> an option.
> >
> > I tried it on the binary distribution of GNAT 3.15p. I
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so this is not
>> an option.
>
> I tried it on the binary distribution of GNAT 3.15p. I did not get
> any warnings:
Hmm, I can't reproduce it right now.
ACT's GNAT, but does that violate the Debian Policy?
>
> The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so this is not
> an option.
I tried it on the binary distribution of GNAT 3.15p. I did not get
any warnings:
$ mkdir -p ~/tmp/usr/lib ~/tmp/etc ~/tmp/lib
$ touch ~/tmp/etc/ld
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The real problem is the soname. I'm willing to change the soname to
> "libgnat-3.15p.so" (removing the .1) to become more compatible with
> ACT's GNAT, but does that violate the Debian Policy?
The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so
ACT's GNAT, but does that violate the Debian Policy?
>
> The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so this is not
> an option.
I tried it on the binary distribution of GNAT 3.15p. I did not get
any warnings:
$ mkdir -p ~/tmp/usr/lib ~/tmp/etc ~/tmp/lib
$ touch ~/tmp/etc/ld
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The users will receive annoying warnings from ldconfig, so this is not
>> an option.
>
> I tried it on the binary distribution of GNAT 3.15p. I did not get
> any warnings:
Hmm, I can't reproduce it right now.
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
> >> you really want to enable it by default?
> >
> > Well, yes, I would like to, especially since gnat 3.14p did, too.
>
> Ah, let
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, here you go: http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta
Thanks a lot. Here are a few comments:
Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
you really want to enable it by default?
You should bump Standards-Version to the most
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So, here you go: http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta
>
> Thanks a lot. Here are a few comments:
>
> Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
> you really want to enable i
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
>> you really want to enable it by default?
>
> Well, yes, I would like to, especially since gnat 3.14p did, too.
Ah, let's keep the old mistakes. 8-)
> Could you shed some light on
Quoting Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Please write to Florian Weimer first. He already did the job, so
> > it's up to him to decide if he wants him packages to enter the
> > archives rather than yours.
>
> I'm not a DD, so I have no word on
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You should bump Standards-Version to the most recent one (after
>> checking that no changes are necessay).
>
> OK, will do. I was wondering where I could find a diff between
> various Standards-Versions
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So, here you go: http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta
>
> Thanks a lot. Here are a few comments:
>
> Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
> you really want to enable i
Quoting Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Please write to Florian Weimer first. He already did the job, so
> > it's up to him to decide if he wants him packages to enter the
> > archives rather than yours.
>
> I'm not a DD, so I have no word on
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, here you go: http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta
Thanks a lot. Here are a few comments:
Your shared library support is probably incompatible with ACT's. Do
you really want to enable it by default?
You should bump Standards-Version to the most
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> > > libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> > > avai
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> > > libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> > > avai
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> > libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> > available for download here:
> >
> > deb http://users.skynet.b
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> available for download here:
>
> deb http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta testing main
> deb-src http://users.skyne
Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please write to Florian Weimer first. He already did the job, so
> it's up to him to decide if he wants him packages to enter the
> archives rather than yours.
I'm not a DD, so I have no word on this issue. But I'm going to have
a look at Ludovic' pack
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> > libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> > available for download here:
> >
> > deb http://users.skynet.b
Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> available for download here:
>
> deb http://users.skynet.be/ludovic.brenta testing main
> deb-src http://users.skyne
Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please write to Florian Weimer first. He already did the job, so
> it's up to him to decide if he wants him packages to enter the
> archives rather than yours.
I'm not a DD, so I have no word on this issue. But I'm going to have
a look at Ludovic' pack
Quoting Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Folks,
>
> I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> available for download here:
Please write to Florian Weimer first. He already did the job, so
it's
Quoting Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Folks,
>
> I have packaged gnat and gnat-doc 3.15p for Debian on i386, as well as
> libgtkada2 (total, 3 source and 9 binary packages). They are
> available for download here:
Please write to Florian Weimer first. He already did the job, so
it's
This one time, at band camp, Ludovic Brenta said:
[...]
> Finally, my ISP provides very limited space (50 Mb) for me to upload
> my packages; I would like to know if someone can host them in the
> future.
I believe that mentors.debian.net has space available for this sort of
thing, let me see . .
GPL.
I would like some Debian maintainers to have a look at my packages and
tell me about their remarks. These are my first attempts at
packaging.
Also, I would like to know if it is desirable to package GDB 4.17 with
a patch from the gnat 3.15p source distribution that makes it
Ada-aware (under
This one time, at band camp, Ludovic Brenta said:
[...]
> Finally, my ISP provides very limited space (50 Mb) for me to upload
> my packages; I would like to know if someone can host them in the
> future.
I believe that mentors.debian.net has space available for this sort of
thing, let me see . .
GPL.
I would like some Debian maintainers to have a look at my packages and
tell me about their remarks. These are my first attempts at
packaging.
Also, I would like to know if it is desirable to package GDB 4.17 with
a patch from the gnat 3.15p source distribution that makes it
Ada-aware (under
Jon Ward wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 08:47:35PM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:
This is just a reminder that GNAT 3.15p has been released.
I think that it is far more stable that the version from
GCC so it would be nice to make it available to Ada coders.
I recall that some people were
Jon Ward wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 08:47:35PM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:
This is just a reminder that GNAT 3.15p has been released.
I think that it is far more stable that the version from
GCC so it would be nice to make it available to Ada coders.
I recall that some people were
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 08:47:35PM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> This is just a reminder that GNAT 3.15p has been released.
> I think that it is far more stable that the version from
> GCC so it would be nice to make it available to Ada coders.
> I recall that some people wer
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 08:47:35PM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> This is just a reminder that GNAT 3.15p has been released.
> I think that it is far more stable that the version from
> GCC so it would be nice to make it available to Ada coders.
> I recall that some people wer
Hi,
This is just a reminder that GNAT 3.15p has been released.
I think that it is far more stable that the version from
GCC so it would be nice to make it available to Ada coders.
I recall that some people were interested in taking it over.
Cheers,
--
Jérôme Marant
http
Hi,
This is just a reminder that GNAT 3.15p has been released.
I think that it is far more stable that the version from
GCC so it would be nice to make it available to Ada coders.
I recall that some people were interested in taking it over.
Cheers,
--
Jérôme Marant
http
48 matches
Mail list logo
