Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 19:05:24 +0100 From: John Marino <freebsdml@marino.st> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Steps to prune and add Ada ports? Message-ID: <4D29F8E4.6020308@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <c547dfd57b97b26676eb69ea47ce59b8.squirrel@mail.experts-exchange.com> References: <4D22FD63.6070402@marino.st> <AANLkTi=dq0qeXzDFoJPz=AZez7ZvJCTSkNNn7duveB%2B1@mail.gmail.com> <4D234202.6010100@marino.st> <AANLkTikB4MeQ2Da9PBu5qQY_i%2BacPAkwg7tw287=dwKV@mail.gmail.com> <4D29F116.7090802@marino.st> <c547dfd57b97b26676eb69ea47ce59b8.squirrel@mail.experts-exchange.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Okay, I'll figure out how to do that. Now, would it be one shar per port? as opposed to one shar to cover all 7 ports? John On 1/9/2011 6:43 PM, jhelfman@experts-exchange.com wrote: > Customarily, new ports should have a shell archive, or shar, attached to > the PR. > > -jgh > >> So I will submit all 7 ports at once. >> My intention is just to attach a compressed tarball to the PR that >> contain all 7 ports inside. >> Is that alright? >> >> Thanks, >> John >> >> On 1/5/2011 12:53 AM, wen heping wrote: >>> 2011/1/4 John Marino<freebsdml@marino.st>: >>>> Thanks Wen, >>>> I submitted PR 153676 to delete the old gnat doc ports. >>>> Regarding the seven new ports, should I write one PR to cover all >>>> seven, or >>>> seven individual PRs? Some are dependencies of others, so it kind of >>>> makes >>> Both OK. >>> >>> wen >>> >>>> sense to submit them together. >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>>> wen heping wrote: >>>>> Better to send PRs to add or remove these ports. I am intersting to >>>>> take. >>>>> >>>>> wen >>>>> >>>>> 2011/1/4 John Marino<freebsdml@marino.st>: >>>>>> Before opening an Problem Reports, I thought I'd run what I'd like to >>>>>> do >>>>>> by >>>>>> the FreeBSD ports mailing list. >>>>>> >>>>>> The following five ports need to be deleted: >>>>>> lang/gnat-doc-html >>>>>> lang/gnat-doc-info >>>>>> lang/gnat-doc-ps >>>>>> lang/gnat-doc-texi >>>>>> lang/gnat-doc-tex >>>>>> Reason: These provide documentation for GNAT 3.15p, which was >>>>>> deleted >>>>>> from >>>>>> the ports tree more than 5 years ago. Should I submit a PR to get >>>>>> this >>>>>> done? There is no maintainer listed for them. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Secondly, I've been working for months to bring GNAT, the GNAT >>>>>> Programming >>>>>> Studio (GPS), the Ada Web Server (AWS), and other packages to all >>>>>> four >>>>>> major >>>>>> BSDs. The website tracking the progress of this work is >>>>>> http://www.dragonlace.net >>>>>> >>>>>> I've already developed seven FreeBSD ports for the following: >>>>>> GNAT-AUX (based on GCC 4.6) >>>>>> GPS 5.0 >>>>>> AWS 2.10w >>>>>> GPRBuild-AUX >>>>>> GnatPython >>>>>> GTKAda 2.22 >>>>>> XML/Ada 4.1w >>>>>> >>>>>> The last six ports on the list don't currently exist in the tree. >>>>>> "GNAT >>>>>> AUX" is a significantly patched version of GNAT that passes all tests >>>>>> (~3200) on both AMD64 and i386. >>>>>> >>>>>> It should replace the gnat-gcc44 port which doesn't produce a usable >>>>>> AMD64 >>>>>> GNAT (The port maintainer agreed on IRC #Ada). Additionally, >>>>>> gnat-gcc42 >>>>>> should be pruned because it doesn't build on FreeBSD 8. The other >>>>>> FSF >>>>>> GNAT >>>>>> port is gnat-gcc43. It builds on FreeBSD 7 and 8, but only for the >>>>>> i386 >>>>>> platform. I don't know how well it passes the regression testsuite. >>>>>> There >>>>>> could be a debate if there's value in having gnat-gcc43 in the tree >>>>>> once >>>>>> GNAT-AUX is available. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some of the proposed ports require "GPRBuild" to build, and the >>>>>> version >>>>>> of >>>>>> GPRBuild I'm providing requires GNAT AUX. It will not build on GNAT >>>>>> GPL >>>>>> or >>>>>> any gnat-gcc both due to changes in the compiler and hardcoded >>>>>> executable >>>>>> names. This would also be a reason to prune the older GNAT ports as >>>>>> they >>>>>> would not be able to build many (or any?) of the Ada software in the >>>>>> ports >>>>>> tree anyway. >>>>>> >>>>>> What's the best approach to add these 7 Ada ports (again, already >>>>>> developed) >>>>>> and start removing the useless ones? I'm willing to maintain the >>>>>> all >>>>>> the >>>>>> ports that I submit. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> John >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list >>>>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports >>>>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>>>>> "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>>>>> >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D29F8E4.6020308>