Re: PolyORB, GCC, and Debian (was Re: Recompiling?)

["Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>]

Vadim Godunko <vgodunko@rost.ru> writes:
> Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>> Also, PolyORB might replace GLADE; you'd want to coordinate with the
>> developers of PolyORB.

Are you the Vadim Gudunko who is one of the authors of PolyORB?  Thank
you very much for your insight.  Is there a particular reason why you
mailed me privately rather than posting to comp.lang.ada?  May I send
your post myself?

> Current development version of PolyORB require at least GCC 3.4.1. May
> be it will be work with GCC 4.0.2. :(

This is bad news, but it seems that PolyORB 1.2r can be compiled with
GNAT Pro 3.16a1, so perhaps 3.15p may be able to compile it as well,
with some patching.

I don't think that a package maintainer would be very interested in
following the CVS HEAD of PolyORB, unless they were a PolyORB
developer themselves.

> The DSA personality (replacement of GLADE) may work with GCC 4.0.2 if
> someone integrate several related patches from GCC HEAD. Even you are
> use PolyORB's DSA personality you are need gnatdist program from GLADE
> (current development version of GLADE have correct version of this
> tool).

This sounds like a packager's nightmare.  Personally, I have rather
negative views on the way AdaCore does configuration management.  They
seem to go out of their way to make packager's jobs more difficult.

Note that the reason why I didn't package PolyORB is that it is a
generic middleware; I felt that I had to provide either all
personalities, or none at all. Providing no personality was easier :)
Also, I don't use it myself, and I would have done a lousy job of
supporting it for Debian users.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.