[Pkg-ace-devel] Plan for ACE+TAO upload

[Thomas Girard]

Hello,

I have a brand new laptop. I'm giving a try to ACE+TAO debian packages
right now.

I've reworked debian/changelog so that it has a single entry.

On 11/04/2010 19:55, Marek Brudka wrote:
>> I had a quick look at work that was commited and this
>> looks good. One thing I have not tested yet was the
>> transitioning between 5.6.3 and the new version.
> I also did not verify if everything is correct. Just started using
> x.7.7 directly.

I'll check that.

>> Other points I'd like to discuss:
>>   - library changed back from libace-$V.so to libace.so.$V
>>   - having mwc.pl and mpc.pl in /usr/bin. What is the need
>>     for this? Debian policy prevents explicit extensions of
>>     executable available from the path (1)
> Starting form r647 (x.7.7) there is no *.pl in /usr/bin. There was a
> revision where I put mwc.pl into /usr/bin as mwc-ace just did not work
> correctly. Then I looked more  thouroughly at the problem and changed
> soft linking order to remove the bug. In r647 for x.7.7 there should
> be no m[w,p]c.pl in /usr/bin.
>>   - new packages needed for some libraries? I haven't checked
>>     whether new packages were needed, but given that new packages
>>     will be added because of versioning change, packages will go
>>     to NEW. Hence if we need to introduce new packages we should
>>     do it at the same time.
> In r650 for x.7.7 the only new packages are for netsvcs. For a while I
> created library packages for libgperf (r639) as dpkg-buildpackage
> complained about additional files, but then I removed them (r640). It
> is rather better to wait for package request rather than propose them
> in advance.

> Important bugs:
>
> 1. *.so links are packed into *-dev packages. This prevents using
> ACE_Service_Configurator, for example dynamic iop protocols (!), when
> only runtime libraries are installed. Either, we should patch a
> Service_Configurator to  look for *.so.5.7.7 libraries or just move
> *.so links from dev packages into runtime ones. I prefer the second
> option as it definitively solves the problem for next ACE revisions.
> What is your opinion?

I'd go for the ACE_Service_Configurator patching. I think that's what
patch 34 was supposed to fix.

> 2. Missing man pages..
>
> 3. To enable using TAO_IDL I made a quick bugfix and placed  *.[p]idl
> files in /usr/include/[tao,orbsvcs] of *-dev libraries. I think that a
> better idea is to follow debian convention and install *[p]idl files
> in /usr/share/idl/[tao,orbsvcs]. What is your opinion?

What was the issue?

Thanks,
Regards,

Thomas