Re: RFC: ATTENTION ALL PORTS/PACKAGES MAINTAINERS!

Most mspgcc package names pre-date the conception of RH's implementation by
some number of years.  I agree issuing new packages with a different
toolchain under the same name would be unwise.

A clean distinction is that mspgcc traditionally used msp430-cmd while
msp430 gcc uniformly uses msp430-elf-cmd for all toolchain commands.  If
that distinction were reflected in the package names, it might be very
simple to have parallel installations.

Peter



On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Peter Johansson <[email protected]>wrote:

> Apologies for shouting in the subject, but I believe this is critical
> issue for all ports/packages maintainers.
>
> I implore you to read Peter Bigot's post of September 23, 2013
> regarding the naming of GCC releases for the MSP430, the summary of
> which follows:
>
> > To help reduce confusion, though, I propose the following nomenclature:
> >
> > * mspgcc refers specifically to the toolchain started by Dmitry Diky and
> > Chris Liechti and "finished" by me;
> >
> > * gcc refers generically to the upstream toolchain GNU C;
> >
> > * msp430 gcc (or gcc msp430) would refer to the new port of msp430 to the
> > upstream toolchain.
>
> The number of different versions of GCC for the MSP430 in the past has
> caused no end of confusion, and Red Hat's new version is likely to
> continue this trend unless appropriate measures are taken, and taken
> soon.  (It could be argued that this confusion is already
> happening...)
>
> While it seems clear that Red Hat's version will be the long term
> future for GCC for the MSP430, there are many people (myself included)
> who will be sticking with Peter's version until such time as Red Hat's
> version has been formally released and thoroughly tested.  However,
> Red Hat's version will only see broad use (and testing) if it is also
> included in packaged formats.
>
> As such, I strongly suggest that all package maintainers include
> *both* versions for the foreseeable future.  Unfortunately, it appears
> that many distributions already have package names that contradict
> Peter's proposed naming scheme.
>
> It is my hope that this thread can be used to sort out this mess and
> provide for some package naming standards going forward.
>
> Please discuss.
>
> -p.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WatchGuard Dimension instantly turns raw network data into actionable
> security intelligence. It gives you real-time visual feedback on key
> security issues and trends.  Skip the complicated setup - simply import
> a virtual appliance and go from zero to informed in seconds.
>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=123612991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Mspgcc-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WatchGuard Dimension instantly turns raw network data into actionable 
security intelligence. It gives you real-time visual feedback on key
security issues and trends.  Skip the complicated setup - simply import
a virtual appliance and go from zero to informed in seconds.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=123612991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk

_______________________________________________
Mspgcc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users