1 |
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 11:11 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
2 |
> On Thursday 21 September 2006 10:56, Duncan Coutts wrote: |
3 |
> > If we do go in this direction it'd be great to be able to slot on the |
4 |
> > ABI and still have dependencies resolved correctly. For example imagine |
5 |
> > having parallel python-2.3 and 2.4 installations with some libs |
6 |
> > installed for both. Crucially, deps need to be resolved to the version |
7 |
> > of a lib with the right ABI. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> ugh, no ... we are not a binary distribution so we should not have to worry |
10 |
> about ABI baggage |
11 |
|
12 |
So we can't ever install two versions of python or ghc at once? That |
13 |
seems a shame. |
14 |
|
15 |
> we SLOT based upon API, not ABI |
16 |
|
17 |
Here's another example; I'm not sure if it passes the ABI/API test: |
18 |
|
19 |
We would like to support 3 Haskell implementations: |
20 |
* GHC which compiles to native code (ELF binaries & static .a libs) |
21 |
* Hugs which is an interpreter so installation is .hs source files |
22 |
* YHC which compiles to portable bytecode |
23 |
|
24 |
A single Haskell library is likely to work with all three |
25 |
implementations. So that's API. |
26 |
|
27 |
Once installed however each implementation is very different. So that's |
28 |
incompatible ABI. |
29 |
|
30 |
This could be 'solved' by having dev-haskell/foo-ghc, |
31 |
dev-haskell/foo-hugs, dev-haskell/foo-yhc, but that's obviously not the |
32 |
Gentoo way (though it's pretty much what debian does). |
33 |
|
34 |
These multiple impls is pretty similar to multiple versions of the same |
35 |
compiler. |
36 |
|
37 |
So my point is, I don't think it can be simply dismissed as ABI nonsense |
38 |
that we don't have to deal with. Being able to SLOT on the compiler |
39 |
flavour (and possibly version) would allow us to do useful things that |
40 |
we cannot currently do. |
41 |
|
42 |
Duncan |
43 |
|
44 |
-- |
45 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |