On 10/02/2012 06:14 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
Is any of the code public, in the sense that you could give e.g. me access for
benchmarking purposes? We are currently using a presumably suboptimal
optimization pass schedule, which for example doesn't include the auto
vectorizer, but are going to s
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:46:58 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
The executables produced are nice and fast -- maybe about
10-15% slower than GDC for the number-crunching code I tested,
[…]
Is any of the code public, in the sense that you could give e.g.
me access for benchmarking p
On 09/27/2012 12:02 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
I'd love to, but it would be irresponsible to commit to it as (right now
especially) I don't have a very good idea of what time I'll be able to offer.
Just to follow up here -- a couple of days ago I pulled LDC from GitHub and
built it. F
On 28/09/12 00:31, Russel Winder wrote:
Having a D apt repository remains a good move. In fact isn't there one
already? It's contents could be widened to include all deb from D stuff.
There certainly used to be, but IIRC it has fallen into disuse.
But it's still better to have packages in the
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:46 +0200, David Nadlinger wrote:
[…]
> Joseph, Russel, you seem to be both personally interested in
> D/LDC and quite knowledgeable about Debian-style packaging. Might
> I suggest that you think about joining the LDC forces as a
> package maintainer? It certainly isn't a
On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 07:50 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[…]
> Yeah that's the other way to do it: build your own .deb's, and create an
> apt repository on dlang.org (or somewhere), then publish the repository
> URL. Then users can simply add the URL to /etc/apt/sources.list, and
> they will be able to
On Sep 27, 2012, at 12:20 AM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On 9/27/2012 12:02 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> On 27 September 2012 03:14, Brad Roberts wrote:
>>>
>>> #4 there implies it's a source package, though I could be mis-interpreting
>>> you. Is there a path for externally built binary packages? T
On Thursday, 27 September 2012 at 00:51:29 UTC, Brad Roberts
wrote:
I have on my personal todo list a few major items (among many
others):
1) add support for multiple projects (dmd2 being the only one
currently)
2) add packaging of built artifacts for master builds
3) add uploading of package
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:20:46AM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On 9/27/2012 12:02 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
[...]
> > For #4, yes. Ubuntu is a better platform to approach for externally
> > built binary-only packages. But for debian, you could possibly do
> > something similar to how eg: the flash-
On 2012-09-27 11:46, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Would Debian have a problem with a dmd package in non-free? Would
Ubuntu have a problem with it in the multiverse or partner repositories?
Doesn't at least Ubuntu proprietary software, like drivers?
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On Thursday, 27 September 2012 at 02:07:32 UTC, Brad Roberts
wrote:
That works well for packages which are single source tree. The
current
dmd, druntime, phobos, d-programming-language, tools separation
makes that
a little more challenging to put together, but not a lot. It's
probably
worth d
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 07:14:12PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:58:08PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I don't know what's involved in getting built-packages into the
> > > various distributions. I suspect that a
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:46:12AM +0200, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On 27/09/12 09:20, Brad Roberts wrote:
> >On reflection, #4 is not going to work for dmd.. neither ubuntu nor
> >debian, nor most distributions are going to be happy with the license
> >situation.
>
> Would Debian have a pr
On 27/09/12 12:43, Iain Buclaw wrote:
The source package for clang has mostly everything set-up for you.
Source deps, Binary deps, etc. I'd imagine the build process would be
similar, just a case of replacing the clang sources with ldc, and
tweaking the rules file to pick up ldc-specific install
On Thursday, 27 September 2012 at 10:43:08 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
I meant clang. :-)
Clang is an entirely different story, because it is built as part
of the LLVM source tree/build process, checked out into
llvm/tools/clang (at least usually, don't know if it's possible
to build it separate
On 27 September 2012 11:27, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
> On 27/09/12 12:11, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>> I also managed to royally screw up when going through beginners'
>>> packaging
>>> instructions for Ubuntu, so I'm not sure I'm the best choice here ... :-\
>>
>>
>> I'd advise to retrieve th
On 27/09/12 12:11, Iain Buclaw wrote:
I also managed to royally screw up when going through beginners' packaging
instructions for Ubuntu, so I'm not sure I'm the best choice here ... :-\
I'd advise to retrieve the LLVM source package and tailor for LDC
instead rather than building from scratch.
On 27 September 2012 11:02, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
> On 26/09/12 17:46, David Nadlinger wrote:
>>
>> Joseph, Russel, you seem to be both personally interested in D/LDC and
>> quite
>> knowledgeable about Debian-style packaging. Might I suggest that you think
>> about
>> joining the LDC for
On 26/09/12 17:46, David Nadlinger wrote:
Joseph, Russel, you seem to be both personally interested in D/LDC and quite
knowledgeable about Debian-style packaging. Might I suggest that you think about
joining the LDC forces as a package maintainer? It certainly isn't a huge amount
of work to do, b
On 27/09/12 09:20, Brad Roberts wrote:
On reflection, #4 is not going to work for dmd.. neither ubuntu nor debian, nor
most distributions are going to be happy
with the license situation.
Would Debian have a problem with a dmd package in non-free? Would Ubuntu have a
problem with it in the m
On 2012-09-27 09:02, Iain Buclaw wrote:
For #4, yes. Ubuntu is a better platform to approach for externally
built binary-only packages. But for debian, you could possibly do
something similar to how eg: the flash-plugin installer package works
- downloads the tar.gz/zip from an external site,
On 9/27/2012 12:02 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 27 September 2012 03:14, Brad Roberts wrote:
>>
>> #4 there implies it's a source package, though I could be mis-interpreting
>> you. Is there a path for externally built binary packages? That's fairly
>> counter to the general distribution philosop
On 27 September 2012 03:14, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:58:08PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> [...]
>> > I don't know what's involved in getting built-packages into the
>> > various distributions. I suspect that a number of them pre
On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:58:08PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> [...]
> > I don't know what's involved in getting built-packages into the
> > various distributions. I suspect that a number of them prefer to be
> > built by their own automation from origina
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:58:08PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
[...]
> I don't know what's involved in getting built-packages into the
> various distributions. I suspect that a number of them prefer to be
> built by their own automation from original (or forked) sources. I'd
> be happy to engage w
On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 16:46, David Nadlinger wrote:
> > On Friday, 21 September 2012 at 19:59:36 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd add here that you're talking about by far the most widely used distro.
> >> [?]
> >> Isn't it worth someone f
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 06:11:08PM +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 26 September 2012 16:46, David Nadlinger wrote:
[...]
> > Joseph, Russel, you seem to be both personally interested in D/LDC
> > and quite knowledgeable about Debian-style packaging. Might I
> > suggest that you think about joining
On 26 September 2012 16:46, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Friday, 21 September 2012 at 19:59:36 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
>>
>> I'd add here that you're talking about by far the most widely used distro.
>> […]
>> Isn't it worth someone from the LDC team discussing with the Ubuntu people
>>
On Friday, 21 September 2012 at 19:59:36 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
I'd add here that you're talking about by far the most widely
used distro.
[…]
Isn't it worth someone from the LDC team discussing with the
Ubuntu people concerned (e.g. the person who decided to
blacklist the package
On 9/20/2012 1:08 PM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 18:03:18 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 17:26:25 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Some rather urgent news: LDC has just been blacklisted in Ubuntu.
It would be great if somebody from
On 22/09/12 11:13, Russel Winder wrote:
Perhaps even better talk with the Debian people to find a route into the
Debian repository, which then automatically gets to be part of Ubuntu
and Mint.
In the bigger picture yes, but as in this case it's Ubuntu that's blacklisted
the package, probably b
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 21:00 +0100, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
[…]
> Isn't it worth someone from the LDC team discussing with the Ubuntu people
> concerned (e.g. the person who decided to blacklist the package) and try and
> get
> their feedback and advice on packaging? My experience is that
On 20/09/12 19:04, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 17:26:25 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Some rather urgent news: LDC has just been blacklisted in Ubuntu.
It is not really news, as the LDC version in the Debian repo has not been
updated for ages.
It's not news
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 20:07:56 UTC, Jonas Drewsen
wrote:
I've done some debs before and might be able to find some time
to do it depending on how complex the package is.
I haven't tried LDC before though. Can you provide some info on
how to get started with the LDC building/packagi
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 18:03:18 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
Unfortunately, nobody on the core dev team uses Ubuntu for
their daily work, or has other experiences with Debian packages.
I didn't mean "packages" of course, but "packaging". Knowing how
to use dpkg or build the occasiona
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 18:03:18 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 17:26:25 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
Some rather urgent news: LDC has just been blacklisted in
Ubuntu.
It would be great if somebody from the D community experienced
in packaging c
On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 17:26:25 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
Some rather urgent news: LDC has just been blacklisted in
Ubuntu.
It is not really news, as the LDC version in the Debian repo has
not been updated for ages. But yes, it would definitely be
important to have an LDC
Some rather urgent news: LDC has just been blacklisted in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ldc/+bug/941549
This seems to be entirely down to no one keeping the Debian
universe up to date with the latest LDC work. :-(
Could someone on the LDC team get in touch with Ubuntu and s
38 matches
Mail list logo
