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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,b5a423f2d50e9a6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-22 12:36:04 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!excite.it!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.com!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail From: "Juergen Pfeifer" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Where is the Ada for LINUX Team site? Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 21:33:10 +0100 Organization: T-Online Message-ID: <920dq7$jch$01$1@news.t-online.com> References: <8v9klo$rgl$1@neptunium.btinternet.com> <8v9vgk$v8j$06$1@news.t-online.com> <8va26k$bqb$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8vbhu4$fqh$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8vcjtb$ees$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8venks$634$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8vfkr2$u2b$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8vflfv$uft$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8vk9ou$9fj$00$1@news.t-online.com> <3A2838CD.18F2446A@ebox.tninet.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: news.t-online.com 977517191 01 19857 79mep2ESpAtGW 001222 20:33:11 X-Complaints-To: abuse@t-online.com X-Sender: 340028232866-0001@t-dialin.net X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3373 Date: 2000-12-22T21:33:10+01:00 List-Id: > > and I hope that we'll move this forward to a system where Ada programmers > > can use some kind of wizards to produce their own ALT compliant RPMs. > > ALT compliant RPMs in this case is about the fact that > RPMSs of sw written in Ada must be packaged in a certain > way to allow run-time linking with the shared-libraries > in gnat-*-runtime. > Actually it means a bit more. It means that an authors RPM should fit into the dependency tree of ALT packages, that it relocates the same way the current ALT packages can do (note: all ALT packages are designed to be relocatable, i.e. you may use --prefix as rpm option to install it in a user defined location; this is a prereq. for non-root installs). Moreover the software in the package should follow the ALT directory scheme where to store the packages and the objects. The software in the package itself need not to care about being build as shared lib or not. The only real difference wrt. to a shared runtime is, that we changed the default behaviour of GNAT. Also ACTs version on Linux supports a shared runtime, but the default is to link statically. IMHO ALT compliance is therefore more related to package organisation and overall coherence of the ALT packages and not so much about the shared runtime default. The idea behind all that is to allow you to install an ALT package and just use it without any further configuration, environment settings etc. Everything fits together. J�rgen