The D ecosystem in Debian with free-as-in-freedom DMD

rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Tue Apr 11 07:04:44 PDT 2017


On 11/04/2017 3:01 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2017-04-11 14:56, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
>> That's basically what's required with D. It is not ABI compatible across
>> releases, and while ABI compatibility might be nice, it really isn't
>> reasonable with D - especially with how attributes work and how template
>> heavy D code is. If the D compiler gets upgraded, then anything that gets
>> built needs everything that it depends on to have been built with that
>> exact
>> compiler version.
>>
>> But if we just use dub - which _is_ the official packaging and build
>> tool -
>> then we avoid these issues. Ideally, the compiler and dub would be
>> part of
>> the distro, but libraries don't need to be. And it sounds like that's
>> basically how the Go and Rust folks want to function as well. So, it
>> would
>> make sense for these languages to simply not have their libraries be
>> included in distros. The build tools are plenty.
>
> I agree, but I think that they want to avoid having packages that
> require dependencies outside of the Debian tree to build. That is, a
> user end application written in D, that is built using Dub. To solve
> that and still use Dub they would need to package the dependent
> libraries as source packages and somehow point Dub to the library in the
> Debian tree and not code.dlang.org. I don't see why that wouldn't be
> possible and if anything needs to be changed in Dub for that, I think
> that's reasonable.

/usr/share/source/D/package-name-version

Add a search path like that to Dub and create source only library 
packages and that is pretty much all the distribution we need for 
libraries I reckon.

Destroy!


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list