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

[Marek Brudka]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Thomas,
W dniu 30.05.2010 20:43, Thomas Girard pisze:
> 1. I have wrong files embedded in some -dev packages, e.g.:
> /usr/lib/ace/TAO/orbsvcs/IFR_Service/home/tgg/src/deb/pkg-ace/ACE_wrappers/TAO/TAO_IDL/include
>
>
>
(yes, /home/tgg/src/deb/pkg-ace is where I build from)
Funny. It is certainly incorrect.
>
> 2. $TAO_ROOT/orbscvs and $TAO_ROOT/orbsvcs/orbsvcs headers are
> mixed up in /usr/include/TAO/orbscvs. I don't think we need all
> these headers. Ideally we only need headers that contain classes
> marked for export. I saw that ACE+TAO 5.7.9+.1.7.9 will include a
> 'make install' mechanism, we could use it to remove the need for
> *.ins files.
Nice to have make install in the next ACE version instead of
prj_install.pl. But do you know if make install does not depend on
prj_install.pl?
> Examples of files we don't need (the path is the one in
> libtao-orbsvcs-dev) - /usr/include/orbsvcs/Event_Service/* -
> /usr/include/orbsvcs/Naming_Service/* IOW all header files for
> implementation of services are useless for redistribution in
> packages. It's clearly related to the use of *.ins files, but I
> have no idea how to improve that.
I am not quite sure which implementation headers should be removed.
Some CORBA applications link against service implementation and start
their own services eg. EventService to be independent on the external
instance.
> 3. Lorica tries to use tao_idl from $TAO_ROOT/TAO_IDL/tao_idl so I
> think we could move the real binary here (instead of the current
> $TAO_ROOT/tao_idl). It also seems (not sure yet) to rely on tao_ifr
> being available as $TAO_ROOT/orbsvcs/IFR_Service/tao_ifr. This is
> more complicated since $TAO_ROOT/orbscvs is a symlink to
> /usr/include/orbsvcs. I don't want to move the tao_ifr binary
> somewhere beneath /usr/include. Of course, we could patch lorica,
> but that's not the point; the point is that software expecting an
> ACE+TAO distribution tend to use path from the source distribution.
> Can we get them to work without change? Is it worth the effort?
Hard to tell.. Most build systems  assume that compilers and auxiliary
tools are PATH-reachable. Maybe we should gently persuade the external
applications to follow this assumption also for tao binaries eg.
prepare a bootstrap scripts which warn about deprecated location ?
Nevertheless, I suppose that additional links will mess pkg-ace too
much :)

Marek


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMBBw5AAoJED+r15Q8F6CGD8sIAIAeZ4MXBK+eE2F582Rhs/m1
TDV+QVAAvYqsB8TSUtDIuDRFr/Obn5JgvYOUa/G2ZooDLWPb/JiUjFqCfleTar0X
ibpLE8qf9wm4elAOEiqjM6Iv2K/2WUeXl8qYDjAVR7swEdF3/Sp/gCeBqhcuGj7K
w512Ag7ZWnqTgLl/uchTi4jHrZLWTAos6Ew4rae/eLFavKq/SaXU4ftrXySatv+e
loqvI8uAeD1btw28t1He+pzDwZyOhC1bqPtJBFZMKMWUnvevKAeNWOlHimw5I6ZO
sEPq7gKHBvw/1oHpM2AlXPSdLmkWXvUG3hDn5cKD8fEGq5e2sloW58XO1wEtGVc=
=TVyv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----