Prev: Default array base index
Next: Allocators and memory reclamation
From: Simon Wright on 27 Jan 2008 14:36
I've uploaded this to the GNU Ada project at SourceForge:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=12974&package_id=260618&release_id=571804

--S
From: Martin Krischik on 28 Jan 2008 03:56
Simon Wright schrieb:

> I've uploaded this to the GNU Ada project at SourceForge:
> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=12974&package_id=260618&release_id=571804

Super - but just a nitpick: We have the architecture as part of the
package name and not as part of the version. The reason is that on
"Browse all Files" [1] only the newest release is opened and only the
last 3 releases are shown at all.

So if you make the architecture part of the version only the last
released architecture is shown in full (mildly annoying) and when there
are more then three architectures then the first released architectures
becomes invisible (very annoying).

Martin

[1] http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=12974
--
mailto://krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net
Ada programming at: http://ada.krischik.com
From: Simon Wright on 28 Jan 2008 14:58
Martin Krischik <krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net> writes:

> Super - but just a nitpick: We have the architecture as part of the
> package name and not as part of the version. The reason is that on
> "Browse all Files" [1] only the newest release is opened and only
> the last 3 releases are shown at all.

OK - but I don't see this policy defined anywhare? and I don't
understand the R6, R7, R8 tags?
From: Martin Krischik on 29 Jan 2008 02:16
Simon Wright schrieb:
> Martin Krischik <krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net> writes:
>
>> Super - but just a nitpick: We have the architecture as part of the
>> package name and not as part of the version. The reason is that on
>> "Browse all Files" [1] only the newest release is opened and only
>> the last 3 releases are shown at all.
>
> OK - but I don't see this policy defined anywhere?

That was decided when the project was started - guess we forgot to write
it down.

> and I don't
> understand the R6, R7, R8 tags?

Most packages deliver more then just the compiler. The R6, R7, R8
indicate which collection of packages will work together. The need for
such distinction comes largely from "hidden" compiler library which is
needed to compile ASIS, GLADE and the GPS.

Sadly AdaCore claims it is not possible to create a proper library for
use with ASIS, GLADE and the GPS. Only Ludovic has proven long ago that
this is not true.

Martin
--
mailto://krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net
Ada programming at: http://ada.krischik.com
From: Ludovic Brenta on 29 Jan 2008 03:41
Martin Krischik wrote:
> Simon Wright schrieb:
> > Martin Krischik <krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> >
> >> Super - but just a nitpick: We have the architecture as part of the
> >> package name and not as part of the version. The reason is that on
> >> "Browse all Files" [1] only the newest release is opened and only
> >> the last 3 releases are shown at all.
> >
> > OK - but I don't see this policy defined anywhere?
>
> That was decided when the project was started - guess we forgot to write
> it down.
>
> > and I don't understand the R6, R7, R8 tags?
>
> Most packages deliver more then just the compiler. The R6, R7, R8
> indicate which collection of packages will work together. The need for
> such distinction comes largely from "hidden" compiler library which is
> needed to compile ASIS, GLADE and the GPS.

Yes but also the fact that Ada guarantees consistency of executables.
GNAT implements this by means of the ALI files which contain a
checksum of the corresponding source files. If a system.ads changes,
everything must be recompiled. Since system.ads and version.ads change
with each release of libgnat, everything must be recompiled to work
with the new libgnat. In addition, each new major release can change
the ABI.

I do have one remark: the R6, R7, R8 are necessary only because the
GNU Ada packages are not part of their target distributions; they are
add-ons. If the various GNU Ada package maintainers would join
OpenSuSE, Fedora, OpenSolaris and MinGW, it would become possible to
incorporate the packages into each release of these distributions. I'm
sure the GNU Ada packages are much more stable and functional than the
ones in the various distributions.

> Sadly AdaCore claims it is not possible to create a proper library for
> use with ASIS, GLADE and the GPS. Only Ludovic has proven long ago that
> this is not true.

:)

--
Ludovic Brenta.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Default array base index
Next: Allocators and memory reclamation