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: 103376,72a4f44afacb49df
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.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: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 08:31:48 -0500
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Question on setting up libraries
References: <1152998024.669864.21010@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
	<1230753.DarpVSqsSo@linux1.krischik.com>
	<1153052044.114830.184030@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
	<878xmt3f70.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<1153055835.051381.88680@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:32:10 +0200
Message-ID: <87y7ut1xr9.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pGf4vQl3VsC0ceBGAud/hwGgrSA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.235.236.158
X-Trace: 
 sv3-xj7g7txUovYXPXsS0Q2+bLQpb5mISAL6CKDLYHEyg/loxmH48kR2wBH7RBSJgLd7J0mukyNGQszcF45!n3eBgEdZKKq3wcQATCTnCHXdZt9XIqMYqK3fQlnrfBA5P5m1OnSYolZ1utbYcO4/2IdFEARGLv0=
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:5729
Date: 2006-07-16T15:32:10+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

randomm@mindless.com writes:
> Actually my preference is generally to tolerate a larger executable
> in order to make packaging simpler and reduce external dependencies
> for the user.  So your first explanation about the .a seems to be
> most helpful.  I understand the tradeoff, but I prefer to be able to
> guarantee my environment to the extent possible rather than to bet
> on the questionable valuable of new library versions, at least this
> is how I did it "back in the old country."

That's fine for a one-off program, but not if you want to provide a
complete platform or suite of programs.  YYMV.

[...]

> so in my trivial test scenario it seems that I need the .o files.  I
> haven't had time to go through all the materials you and the other
> people have suggested so perhaps this is all explained therein.
>
> I haven't proven it but it certainly looks as though the libAdaCurses.a
> contains all the necessary object files so I should find out how to use
> those and then I can remove all the .o files from adalib.

Yes.  See below.

>> That's why, for example, the Debian Policy for Ada *forbids*
>> library packages from supplying .o files at all.  They must supply
>> the .a static library and the .so shared library instead.
>
> That sounds like a much better idea.  I hope I'll be able to
> utilitize these properly shortly.

To link statically, if libAdaCurses.a is in the current directory:

gnatmake first -g -cargs -gnatfloqv -O -largs libAdaCurses.a

To link dynamically, if you have libAdaCurses.so in /usr/lib:

gnatmake first -g -cargs -gnatfloqv -O -largs -lAdaCurses

> I should note that the libAdaCurses.a was also not copied by the
> make install.  So it still seems a problem.

Yes, that's a second bug in the installation of AdaCurses.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.