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

[Thomas Girard]

Hello,

Le 31/05/2010 22:29, Marek Brudka a écrit :
>> 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.

I'll remove these completely. We don't need to provide TAO_IDL headers.

>> 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?

No idea.

>> 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.

I believe if an header contains a class declaration flagged with an
_Export macro, then we should distribute it. Otherwise the header is
not needed; since linking with this class would not be possible under
Windows for instance (and I think it could also be marked as hidden
with g++).

>> 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 :)

Ack. tao_idl and tao_ifr will stay under /usr/lib/ace/TAO.

Since I'm about to move back to Paris, I would really like to upload a
first experimental package this week-end. Any blocker from your point
of view?

Regards,

Thomas