dub and debian packaging

[Paul O'Neil via Digitalmars-d]

On 01/25/2016 12:08 PM, ikod wrote:
> Hello
> 
> I'd like to hear any opinions and best practices on coexistence of dub
> and debian .deb packaging and deployment.
> 
> Here is my problem: I wrote some small library that use Pegged to parse
> and process user requests. This library can be  used in shebang-scripts
> on servers or can be statically linked to applications. The first case
> require library code and dependencies (Pegged in this case) be deployed
> on servers to some well-known system-wide place like /usr/include/d/ so
> that any developer can simply use line like '#!/usr/bin/rdmd --shebang
> -I/usr/include/d` in his script.
> 
> And here is a problem: we (like many other) distribute our software over
> our debian-based machines using standard debian packaging system. There
> is no problem for me to wrap my library into .deb. The question about
> Pegged or any other dub-based D library - how do you think, what is
> better way to tie together dub and deb-packaged software?
> 
> Should I use some postinstall scripts to fetch-build-deploy Pegged to
> /usr/include/d/ using dub, or should I wrap Pegged in separate .deb and
> include it dependencies in my library or any other package relying on
> Pegged? For me the latter way is better/ but what is your opinion?
> 
> 

I think there's a longer discussion one one of the dub issues that
explains why this doesn't exist yet.  The blocker is that the D ABI is
not compatible across compilers (dmd vs. ldc vs. gdc) or compiler
versions (2.068 vs. 2.069).  Until there's a reasonable resolution to
that problem, I don't think there will be OS packages of libraries.

-- 
Paul O'Neil
Github / IRC: todayman