Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > First, please note that Debian is the only distro that does not ship > shared libraries with the FSF variant of GNAT; all other distros agree > that shared libraries are a good thing.
In fact, the GNU Ada Environment specification I wrote strongly recommends them, even with the sonames you prefer. 8-) > Most of the recent distributions seem to have dropped ACT releases > altogether, in favour of FSF ones. This is unfortunate, because the > ACT releases are more mature and stable. I would like Debian to > include GNAT 3.15p. Yes, that's a good idea. > The soname for FSF versions is also ill-chosen, and is very likely to > change when ACT finally declares the integration between the Ada > front-end and the GCC 3.x back-end to be complete. GCC 3.2 does not > have a problem, but GCC 3.3 uses the same soname as ACT's binary > distribution. This is bad, given the ABI incompatibility. I merely suspect that there is an ABI incompatibility. I'm not sure it's actually there. (No one tests such things.) > In order to ensure that the soname used by ACT and FSF variants remain > different, I think the best is to keep the current scheme for the > soname (libgnat-3.15p.so.1), and to add a prominent warning to this > effect in the description of the package. This has the additional > advantage of sticking to the Debian policy. I agree.
