Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: yac <yac@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] dev-lang/go
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:54:12
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] dev-lang/go by Emery Hemingway
1 On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 15:48:17 -0500
2 Emery Hemingway <emery@×××××××.net> wrote:
4 > I really like working with Go, and would like to see a means of
5 > merging Go packages with Portage. In short I am asking if anyone else
6 > is interested in a Go project.
8 I might be. I have packaged something for private use but it just a
9 bunch of hacks. Anyway, I have some production go code.
11 >
12 > For those who aren't familiar with Go, I will sumarise why Portage and
13 > Go do not play well together.
14 >
15 > Go is static linked by default.
16 > The Go compiler creates static libraries and binaries. Libraries
17 > compilied with different versions of Go (1.1/1.2) may not be linked
18 > into the same binary.
20 Haskell is staticaly linked as well (by default) and you can see the
21 gentoo haskell project. I don't see this as a problem, we just will have
22 all dependencies in DEPEND and will have to scope on the go compiler
23 version under something like /usr/lib/go-1.{1,2}/...
25 I'd just copy the python herd approach (use flags, filesystem scoping
26 and having binary wrapper).
28 > It is possible to compile dynamicly and that may involve using the
29 > GCC frontend, which is probably less tested and less optimized.
31 I'd just skip over this unless someone is really interested in this one,
32 in which case this could be explicitly enabled by a use flag or
33 something.
35 >
36 > Go libraries are usually unversioned.
37 > Libraries outside the system library are resolved with an import
38 > statement that specifies a source code repository, such as a git or
39 > mecurial repository. Most often Go libraries are installed using the
40 > 'go get' tool that clones a repository, and simply assumes HEAD/tip is
41 > the best revision to build against. There is some support for using
42 > git tags but it is not well documented. Often these libraries are very
43 > small for the sake of reuse and to keep APIs simple.
45 In this case we just have to require upstream to make releases or
46 publish either live ebuilds, or ebuilds versioned something like
47 0_preYYYY-MM-DD.ebuild [1]
49 I know part of the gopher commnity doesn't see this as a problem but I
50 believe the big players recognize this and there is an effort to come up
51 with a solution.
53 > If all that sounds bad, thats because it is. Is it worth versioning
54 > many tiny libraries or do we simply cache the repositiories and blame
55 > upstream when things stop compiling?
57 I'd certainly want to have versions where available.
59 >
60 > A have made an eclass for Go and an ebuild for the bitcoin node
61 > written in pure Go to atleast prove that all this is possible. These
62 > are in the 'emery' overlay:
63 >;a=tree;f=eclass
64 >;a=tree;f=dev-go
65 >;a=tree;f=net-p2p/btcd
66 >
67 > The eclass it a bit of a mess but it works, having done that, I would
68 > say that making ebuilds for every go library is tedious, but can be
69 > done almost entirely with boilerplate, almost every time.
70 >
71 > The eclasss installs go source and static libraries
72 > to /usr/lib/go/gentoo (source code and .a library are required to
73 > link). The problem is when Go is updated, this folder may get wiped
74 > out, and if it isn't, those libraries will be incompatable with the
75 > new release anyway.
77 How come it gets wiped? That just shouldn't happen.
79 > The other solution I see is to make a Go directory in /var/cache or
81 I don't think this is a good idea as I think it would be surprising to
82 users to find libraries elsewhere than /usr/lib and I believe /var/cache
83 specificaly even violates FHS.
85 > something like it and just manage it as a cache.
86 > Libraries may come and go but that is fine.
88 I might want to have a library just for development and I'd wouldn't
89 like it disappearing.
91 > Bare repositories may be cached in DISTDIR
92 > just like the git and mercurial eclasses do. Doing things this way may
93 > require a specific utility for Portage that wraps the Go toolchain,
94 > which I would be willing to create. This utility could probably
95 > automatically resolve and fetch the libraries that are required
97 Building the library/package shouldn't/mustn't (what does the PMS
98 say?) require network access once the sources are fetched.
100 > as opposed to making an ebuild for each library, but that raises the
101 > problem of assuming the developers of each library maintain consistant
102 > quality and security.
104 Every ebuild that gets to gentoo official must meet basic standard of
105 quality. That's no different for golang.
107 >
108 >
109 > The problem is Go makes it trivial to build from source, but it does
110 > that in a very different and less precise way than Gentoo. There is
111 > always the option of build bots and installing binaries to /opt...
112 >
113 >
114 > Emery
115 >
117 I think it would be good idea to start a separate gentoo-golang
118 repository (github?) and treat it more (to keep it aligned with the way
119 gentoo works) or less (to speed up the development) as if it were gx86.
121 In the organization part, I think we could inspire ourself in the way
122 gentoo-haskell works.
124 [1]:
126 ---
127 Jan Matějka | Gentoo Developer
128 | Gentoo Linux
129 GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] dev-lang/go Emery Hemingway <emery@×××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-dev] dev-lang/go William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>