www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Fedora 14 will integrate D into the distribution

reply "Paulo Pinto" <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Hi,

it seems that Fedora will provide D out of the box in their distribution.

But they seem to be providing an old version of it.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/D_Programming

Cheers,
Paulo
Sep 28 2010
next sibling parent klickverbot <see klickverbot.at> writes:
On 9/28/10 5:37 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote:

 Hi,

 it seems that Fedora will provide D out of the box in their distribution.

 But they seem to be providing an old version of it.

 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/D_Programming

 Cheers,
 Paulo


Well, as far as I can tell, it's not exactly an old version – there is 
simply no Open Source (in capital letters) compiler for D2, and so they 
have to stick with D1 (where there is LDC).

Yes, there would be GDC for D2 too, but even if it has been resurrected 
lately, it lags behind DMD more than a few versions…
Sep 28 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Michael Chen <sth4nth gmail.com> writes:
Somebody should say something to them to use D 2.0 instead.

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> wrote:

 Hi,

 it seems that Fedora will provide D out of the box in their distribution.

 But they seem to be providing an old version of it.

 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/D_Programming

 Cheers,
 Paulo
Sep 28 2010
parent Robert Clipsham <robert octarineparrot.com> writes:
On 28/09/10 16:52, Michael Chen wrote:

 Somebody should say something to them to use D 2.0 instead.


D2 doesn't have an open source compiler, so it can't be included in the 
main repositories for Fedora.

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/
Sep 28 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent SiegeLord <none none.com> writes:
Paulo Pinto Wrote:


 But they seem to be providing an old version of it.


The stable version, you mean.

-SiegeLord
Sep 28 2010
prev sibling parent reply bioinfornatics <bioinfornatics fedoraproject.org> writes:
Hi,

I am the the fedora packager, in official repo we use ldc as compiler because
fedora want promote only open source project.
It not an old version, ldc works fine for D1 and in this repo
http://blog.fedora-fr.org/bioinfornatics/post/Repo-for-D-programming
They are a ldc compiler and tango briray up to date. At this time ldc use dmdfe
version 1.063.

LDC project is free and open, feel free for help this project and improve
experimental D2 branch.
Special thanks to:
- ChristianK
- mwarning
- klicverbot
- Siegelord
For for their contribution
Sep 28 2010
next sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 9/28/10 16:41 PDT, bioinfornatics wrote:

 Hi,

 I am the the fedora packager, in official repo we use ldc as compiler because
fedora want promote only open source project.
 It not an old version, ldc works fine for D1 and in this repo
http://blog.fedora-fr.org/bioinfornatics/post/Repo-for-D-programming
 They are a ldc compiler and tango briray up to date. At this time ldc use
dmdfe version 1.063.

 LDC project is free and open, feel free for help this project and improve
experimental D2 branch.
 Special thanks to:
 - ChristianK
 - mwarning
 - klicverbot
 - Siegelord
 For for their contribution


Thank you all very much for making this happen! It's an important step 
in D's evolution.

Andrei
Sep 28 2010
prev sibling parent reply Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes gmail.com> writes:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:41 AM, bioinfornatics
<bioinfornatics fedoraproject.org> wrote:

 Hi,

 I am the the fedora packager, in official repo we use ldc as compiler because
fedora want promote only open source project.
 It not an old version, ldc works fine for D1 and in this repo
http://blog.fedora-fr.org/bioinfornatics/post/Repo-for-D-programming
 They are a ldc compiler and tango briray up to date. At this time ldc use
dmdfe version 1.063.


What about D1/Phobos?
You could package gdc (other distributions, e.g. debian, do it).

Cheers,
- Daniel
Sep 29 2010
next sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
As far as I'm aware, they won't accept it because the latest release of GCC it
works against is 4.4.x. Fedora ships 4.5.x, and will be moving onto the 4.6.x
devel snapshot in a few months.

The Pascal compiler has a similar problem too...

Iain
Sep 29 2010
next sibling parent reply Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes gmail.com> writes:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 As far as I'm aware, they won't accept it because the latest release of GCC it
 works against is 4.4.x. Fedora ships 4.5.x, and will be moving onto the 4.6.x
 devel snapshot in a few months.

 The Pascal compiler has a similar problem too...

 Iain


What a pity. Are there plans for porting gdc to GCC 4.5 or 4.6?

IIRC there were discussions about including a D compiler (possibly
GDC) into GCC - what's the status of that?

Cheers,
- Daniel
Sep 29 2010
next sibling parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 06:54:02 -0400, Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes gmail.com>  
wrote:


 On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 As far as I'm aware, they won't accept it because the latest release of  
 GCC it
 works against is 4.4.x. Fedora ships 4.5.x, and will be moving onto the  
 4.6.x
 devel snapshot in a few months.

 The Pascal compiler has a similar problem too...

 Iain


 What a pity. Are there plans for porting gdc to GCC 4.5 or 4.6?

 IIRC there were discussions about including a D compiler (possibly
 GDC) into GCC - what's the status of that?


IIRC, In order for that to happen, Walter would have to assign the  
copyright for the front end to GNU, not likely...

-Steve
Sep 29 2010
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2010-09-29 13:02, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 06:54:02 -0400, Daniel Gibson
 <metalcaedes gmail.com> wrote:


 On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 As far as I'm aware, they won't accept it because the latest release
 of GCC it
 works against is 4.4.x. Fedora ships 4.5.x, and will be moving onto
 the 4.6.x
 devel snapshot in a few months.

 The Pascal compiler has a similar problem too...

 Iain


 What a pity. Are there plans for porting gdc to GCC 4.5 or 4.6?

 IIRC there were discussions about including a D compiler (possibly
 GDC) into GCC - what's the status of that?


 IIRC, In order for that to happen, Walter would have to assign the
 copyright for the front end to GNU, not likely...

 -Steve


Wasn't there talk about forking the DMD front end and assign the 
copyright of the fork to GNU, if I recall correctly. Then DMD and the 
fork would continue to evolve on their own.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Sep 30 2010
parent retard <re tard.com.invalid> writes:
Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:28:33 +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote:


 On 2010-09-29 13:02, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 06:54:02 -0400, Daniel Gibson
 <metalcaedes gmail.com> wrote:


 On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com>
 wrote:

 As far as I'm aware, they won't accept it because the latest release
 of GCC it
 works against is 4.4.x. Fedora ships 4.5.x, and will be moving onto
 the 4.6.x
 devel snapshot in a few months.

 The Pascal compiler has a similar problem too...

 Iain


 What a pity. Are there plans for porting gdc to GCC 4.5 or 4.6?

 IIRC there were discussions about including a D compiler (possibly
 GDC) into GCC - what's the status of that?


 IIRC, In order for that to happen, Walter would have to assign the
 copyright for the front end to GNU, not likely...

 -Steve


 
 Wasn't there talk about forking the DMD front end and assign the
 copyright of the fork to GNU, if I recall correctly. Then DMD and the
 fork would continue to evolve on their own.


I'd like to know how this is possible. I know it's possible to relicense 
code, but how can it have two copyright owners, one per copy, when the 
copies are identical and one is a copy of the other. It's the same code. 
Sure, if both parties start from scratch and work independently, but now 
it's the *same* work. I'm also asking this because it affects a lot of 
situations outside this community.
Oct 02 2010
prev sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
== Quote from Daniel Gibson (metalcaedes gmail.com)'s article

 On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> wrote:

 As far as I'm aware, they won't accept it because the latest release of GCC it
 works against is 4.4.x. Fedora ships 4.5.x, and will be moving onto the 4.6.x
 devel snapshot in a few months.

 The Pascal compiler has a similar problem too...

 Iain


 What a pity. Are there plans for porting gdc to GCC 4.5 or 4.6?
 IIRC there were discussions about including a D compiler (possibly
 GDC) into GCC - what's the status of that?
 Cheers,
 - Daniel


I have a local copy of a 4.5.x tree with gdc inside, but the compiler cannot
*build* any sources just yet. And besides, that has been left stale as other
areas
are being tended to.

Currently doing a marathon sprint to merge D2 frontend with 2.025 by the end of
the month, or within the first week of next month, depending on how many things
get broken in the process...

Iain
Sep 29 2010
parent reply Seth Hoenig <seth.a.hoenig gmail.com> writes:
 Currently doing a marathon sprint to merge D2 frontend with 2.025 by the
 end of
 the month, or within the first week of next month, depending on how many
 things
 get broken in the process...

 Iain



The end of this month? As in about 30 hours from now? Because that would be
really impressive.
Sep 29 2010
parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
== Quote from Seth Hoenig (seth.a.hoenig gmail.com)'s article

 --0016e6498b1e65d61504916adc7e
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

 Currently doing a marathon sprint to merge D2 frontend with 2.025 by the
 end of
 the month, or within the first week of next month, depending on how many
 things
 get broken in the process...

 Iain


 The end of this month? As in about 30 hours from now? Because that would beonly


one more bump to go.

 really impressive.


It really isn't as hard as it appears, well, now that the *big* only one more
bump
to go.stuff is out the way, at least. :-)

http://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/changeset/bc8eff04c73a

Only one more bump to go...

Iain
Sep 29 2010
prev sibling parent reply bioinfornatics <bioinfornatics fedoraproject.org> writes:
yes, you are right
And gdc is not a gcc project
Sep 29 2010
parent reply Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes gmail.com> writes:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:20 PM, bioinfornatics
<bioinfornatics fedoraproject.org> wrote:


 And gdc is not a gcc project


So? It's licensed under GPL, isn't that sufficient? (Besides the
doesn't-support-gcc-4.5/4.6 issue)
Sep 29 2010
parent klickverbot <see klickverbot.at> writes:
On 9/29/10 1:29 PM, Daniel Gibson wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:20 PM, bioinfornatics
 <bioinfornatics fedoraproject.org>  wrote:


 And gdc is not a gcc project


 So? It's licensed under GPL, isn't that sufficient? (Besides the
 doesn't-support-gcc-4.5/4.6 issue)


No, because in order to include your code with mainline GCC, you have to 
reassign the copyright to the Free Software Foundation…
Sep 29 2010
prev sibling parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Daniel Gibson wrote:

 I am the the fedora packager, in official repo we use ldc as compiler because
fedora want promote only open source project.
 It not an old version, ldc works fine for D1 and in this repo
http://blog.fedora-fr.org/bioinfornatics/post/Repo-for-D-programming
 They are a ldc compiler and tango briray up to date. At this time ldc use
dmdfe version 1.063.


 
 What about D1/Phobos?
 You could package gdc (other distributions, e.g. debian, do it).


Packages of D for previous versions of Fedora
are available at http://gdcgnu.sourceforge.net/

It uses D version 1.030 stable, with Phobos or
Tango 0.99.7 Dominik, but only for 32-bit target.

--anders
Sep 29 2010