From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc644ab69865248c,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.scarlet.biz!news.scarlet.biz.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 12:25:10 -0500 From: Ludovic Brenta Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Ada in Debian: retaining old GMGPL libraries? Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:25:31 +0200 Message-ID: <87u05k3xpw.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:YWT1w13EzrHlKDGYDyX6JAjAlnA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.235.204.136 X-Trace: sv3-JDFMSX+tBmyVgqXprkvK6PypXalm3casH2YFJnI1v3WD1eRhVt/TPWBdddZ01F0kbe53hhWrCwVdldd!Ld8dVOnsNMlrNhZwOnclXhjiT0gPupZ1Is907J8ToJrExgj0ydLDNTRcYDw0MvpuNbC8tX9tNMs= X-Complaints-To: abuse@scarlet.be X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@scarlet.biz X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5699 Date: 2006-07-14T19:25:31+02:00 List-Id: I am considering whether or not I should retain old versions of some libraries, under GMGPL, in Debian. Specifically, I am thinking of GtkAda 2.4, XML/Ada 1.0 and AWS 2.0p. I believe that, since these old versions are in Sarge under GMGPL, it is legal for me to continue providing them alongside the newer, GPL versions. Technically, this requires more work on my part, and also makes life a tad more difficult for developers who use the libraries in their programs. I *cannot* and *will not* support parallel versions of any libraries, *unless* I have confidence that: - people actually use both versions - people who use the old GMGPL version will maintain that version (not the packaging: the library itself) So, this is a survey of sorts. If you use, and would like me to keep GtkAda 2.4, AWS 2.0p or XML/Ada 1.0 in Debian, please drop me a note. If you are willing to help with the maintenance of this old version, please drop me a note. If you are willing to set up a project on SourceForge (or other) to maintain the old version, please drop me a note. I will not participate in such projects myself, but will use them as a new "upstream" source for the Debian packages. Example: XML/Ada I have just uploaded the new packages libxmlada2-dev and libxmlada2. They contain XML/Ada 2.2, and I built them in such a way that they can coexist on the same system as libxmlada1-dev and libxmlada1. On a system with both versions installed, there would be two project files to choose from: /usr/share/ada/adainclude/xmlada.gpr (GMGPL) /usr/share/ada/adainclude/xmlada2.gpr (pure GPL) two static libraries: /usr/lib/libxmlada.a /usr/lib/libxmlada2.a and two shared libraries: /usr/lib/libxmlada.so.1.0 /usr/lib/libxmlada.so.1 -> libxmlada.so.1.0 /usr/lib/libxmlada.so -> libxmlada.so.1.0 /usr/lib/libxmlada.so.2.2 /usr/lib/libxmlada.so.2 -> libxmlada.so.2.2 /usr/lib/libxmlada2.so -> libxmlada.so.2.2 As you can see, this scheme requires that programmers change their project files or build scripts if they want to use the new library. This is bad. I still have to recompile libxmlada1 with GCC 4.1 and re-upload. I will do this if and only if - people actually use XML/Ada 1.0 on Debian - people who use XML/Ada 1.0 will maintain that version -- Ludovic Brenta.