[arch-dev-public] gcc / gcc-libs / gcc-fortran / gcc-objc splitup issues
Hi all, Recently we have gotten bugreports about gcc not having certain features of languages because we compile our compiler languages as split packages. (FS#9325). For objc, we already compile objc inside the gcc package, then remove it, to build it again in a package for extra. To fix gfortran, we would need to do the same... I've been thinking about this splitup: gfortran and objc aren't that big. They could be included in the main gcc/gcc-libs PKGBUILDs. For java, we will keep the split package. Other distributions like Debian and Ubuntu also have their gcj things separated. Merging objc doesn't bring extra dependencies, merging fortran brings in mpfr. Do we have a problem with this change?
2008/1/25, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net>:
Hi all,
Recently we have gotten bugreports about gcc not having certain features of languages because we compile our compiler languages as split packages. (FS#9325).
For objc, we already compile objc inside the gcc package, then remove it, to build it again in a package for extra. To fix gfortran, we would need to do the same...
I do the same for virtualbox-ose packages. :-( This would be improved with the support for multiple packages in one PKGBUILD, a couple of solutions were proposed but none exists in pacman-git yet AFAIR.
I've been thinking about this splitup: gfortran and objc aren't that big. They could be included in the main gcc/gcc-libs PKGBUILDs. For java, we will keep the split package. Other distributions like Debian and Ubuntu also have their gcj things separated.
Merging objc doesn't bring extra dependencies, merging fortran brings in mpfr. Do we have a problem with this change?
mpfr seems to be rather small library that depends on gmp which is in Core already, so it seems fine to add it to Core for the sake of easier gcc packaging and fewer bugreports. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Am Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:08:45 +0100 schrieb "Jan de Groot" <jan@jgc.homeip.net>:
Hi all,
Recently we have gotten bugreports about gcc not having certain features of languages because we compile our compiler languages as split packages. (FS#9325).
For objc, we already compile objc inside the gcc package, then remove it, to build it again in a package for extra. To fix gfortran, we would need to do the same...
I've been thinking about this splitup: gfortran and objc aren't that big. They could be included in the main gcc/gcc-libs PKGBUILDs. For java, we will keep the split package. Other distributions like Debian and Ubuntu also have their gcj things separated.
Merging objc doesn't bring extra dependencies, merging fortran brings in mpfr. Do we have a problem with this change?
makes sense to me. let's merge the packages that way when gcc4.2.3 comes out. -Andy
On Jan 25, 2008 3:08 AM, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
Hi all,
Recently we have gotten bugreports about gcc not having certain features of languages because we compile our compiler languages as split packages. (FS#9325).
For objc, we already compile objc inside the gcc package, then remove it, to build it again in a package for extra. To fix gfortran, we would need to do the same...
I've been thinking about this splitup: gfortran and objc aren't that big. They could be included in the main gcc/gcc-libs PKGBUILDs. For java, we will keep the split package. Other distributions like Debian and Ubuntu also have their gcj things separated.
Merging objc doesn't bring extra dependencies, merging fortran brings in mpfr. Do we have a problem with this change?
I'm always a fan of the "if it's easier, but doesn't inconvenience too many people" logic. This seems to fit. I mean, it's going to be way easier for you, I'm sure, AND I doubt many people will complain because of a few megs lost to the fortran libs. ++ from me
On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 12:06 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Jan 25, 2008 3:08 AM, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
Hi all,
Recently we have gotten bugreports about gcc not having certain features of languages because we compile our compiler languages as split packages. (FS#9325).
For objc, we already compile objc inside the gcc package, then remove it, to build it again in a package for extra. To fix gfortran, we would need to do the same...
I've been thinking about this splitup: gfortran and objc aren't that big. They could be included in the main gcc/gcc-libs PKGBUILDs. For java, we will keep the split package. Other distributions like Debian and Ubuntu also have their gcj things separated.
Merging objc doesn't bring extra dependencies, merging fortran brings in mpfr. Do we have a problem with this change?
I'm always a fan of the "if it's easier, but doesn't inconvenience too many people" logic. This seems to fit. I mean, it's going to be way easier for you, I'm sure, AND I doubt many people will complain because of a few megs lost to the fortran libs.
++ from me
I got mail from a user stating that mpfr/gmp were going to be dependencies for gcc 4.3 anyways, so sooner or later mpfr will become a dependency for gcc-libs or gcc anyways. I will change these things when GCC 4.2.3 gets released, which should be somewhere in the next two weeks.
Friday 25 January 2008, Jan de Groot wrote: | Hi all, | | Recently we have gotten bugreports about gcc not having certain | features of languages because we compile our compiler languages as | split packages. (FS#9325). | | For objc, we already compile objc inside the gcc package, then | remove it, to build it again in a package for extra. To fix | gfortran, we would need to do the same... | | I've been thinking about this splitup: gfortran and objc aren't | that big. They could be included in the main gcc/gcc-libs | PKGBUILDs. For java, we will keep the split package. Other | distributions like Debian and Ubuntu also have their gcj things | separated. | | Merging objc doesn't bring extra dependencies, merging fortran | brings in mpfr. Do we have a problem with this change? no problem, i welcome this migration! - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Andreas Radke
-
Damir Perisa
-
Jan de Groot
-
Roman Kyrylych