Hello,

There is a major overhaul scheduled for dmd package in Arch Linux main repositories upon this release, including switch to github branches/tags instead of using source archive. I'd like to debug new packaging scripts but, of course, 2.063 branch is still not there.

Does "staging" content matches dmd2beta.zip sources? If not, can last git commit hashes be mentioned with new beta version?

Regards,
Dicebot
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

P.S.
What is the final state for shared run-time/phobos in this release?
Should I enable those by default in fresh install or they are not
considered ready yet?

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Михаил Страшун <m.strashun@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There is a major overhaul scheduled for dmd package in Arch Linux main repositories upon this release, including switch to github branches/tags instead of using source archive. I'd like to debug new packaging scripts but, of course, 2.063 branch is still not there.
>
> Does "staging" content matches dmd2beta.zip sources? If not, can last git commit hashes be mentioned with new beta version?
>
> Regards,
> Dicebot
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

I'm not really sure what you're asking for, but there isn't a "staging" branch yet for the new beta. There will be soon. It's just "HEAD" for the moment.

On 5/13/2013 1:49 AM, Михаил Страшун wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There is a major overhaul scheduled for dmd package in Arch Linux main
> repositories upon this release, including switch to github
> branches/tags instead of using source archive. I'd like to debug new
> packaging scripts but, of course, 2.063 branch is still not there.
>
> Does "staging" content matches dmd2beta.zip sources? If not, can last
> git commit hashes be mentioned with new beta version?
>
> Regards,
> Dicebot
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>
>

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so

On 5/13/2013 2:24 AM, Михаил Страшун wrote:
> P.S.
> What is the final state for shared run-time/phobos in this release?
> Should I enable those by default in fresh install or they are not
> considered ready yet?
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Михаил Страшун <m.strashun@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> There is a major overhaul scheduled for dmd package in Arch Linux main
>> repositories upon this release, including switch to github
>> branches/tags instead of using source archive. I'd like to debug new
>> packaging scripts but, of course, 2.063 branch is still not there.
>>
>> Does "staging" content matches dmd2beta.zip sources? If not, can last
>> git commit hashes be mentioned with new beta version?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dicebot
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:18:59 Walter Bright wrote:
> We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so

But we're still planning on static linking being the default aren't we? At least until the shared version has been more battle-tested.

- Jonathan M Davis
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

On 5/13/2013 1:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:18:59 Walter Bright wrote:
>> We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so
> But we're still planning on static linking being the default aren't we? At
> least until the shared version has been more battle-tested.
>

Yes. We'll ship with libphobos2.a and libphobos2.so. The .a will be the default.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

Btw I have just checked master build and naming is bit weird for druntime generate shared library : "libdruntime-linux64so.a". Intended or typo?

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/13/2013 1:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:18:59 Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>> We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so
>>
>> But we're still planning on static linking being the default aren't we? At least until the shared version has been more battle-tested.
>>
>
> Yes. We'll ship with libphobos2.a and libphobos2.so. The .a will be the default.
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

That's only for internal builds.

On 5/14/2013 2:45 AM, Михаил Страшун wrote:
> Btw I have just checked master build and naming is bit weird for
> druntime generate shared library : "libdruntime-linux64so.a". Intended
> or typo?
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> On 5/13/2013 1:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>> On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:18:59 Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so
>>> But we're still planning on static linking being the default aren't we? At
>>> least until the shared version has been more battle-tested.
>>>
>> Yes. We'll ship with libphobos2.a and libphobos2.so. The .a will be the
>> default.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmd-beta mailing list
>> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>
>

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

So complete list of libraries that should be installed in the system is this one:

* libdruntime-linux64.a
* libphobos2.a
* libphobos2so.so

Right?

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> That's only for internal builds.
>
>
> On 5/14/2013 2:45 AM, Михаил Страшун wrote:
>>
>> Btw I have just checked master build and naming is bit weird for druntime generate shared library : "libdruntime-linux64so.a". Intended or typo?
>>
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/13/2013 1:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:18:59 Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so
>>>>
>>>> But we're still planning on static linking being the default aren't we?
>>>> At
>>>> least until the shared version has been more battle-tested.
>>>>
>>> Yes. We'll ship with libphobos2.a and libphobos2.so. The .a will be the default.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmd-beta mailing list
>>> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmd-beta mailing list
>> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

No,

libphobos2.a
libphobos2.so

On 5/14/2013 2:55 AM, Михаил Страшун wrote:
> So complete list of libraries that should be installed in the system
> is this one:
>
> * libdruntime-linux64.a
> * libphobos2.a
> * libphobos2so.so
>
> Right?
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> That's only for internal builds.
>>
>>
>> On 5/14/2013 2:45 AM, Михаил Страшун wrote:
>>> Btw I have just checked master build and naming is bit weird for
>>> druntime generate shared library : "libdruntime-linux64so.a". Intended
>>> or typo?
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Walter Bright <walter@digitalmars.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2013 1:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:18:59 Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>> We plan to ship with a libphobos2.so
>>>>> But we're still planning on static linking being the default aren't we?
>>>>> At
>>>>> least until the shared version has been more battle-tested.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes. We'll ship with libphobos2.a and libphobos2.so. The .a will be the
>>>> default.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmd-beta mailing list
>>>> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
>>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmd-beta mailing list
>>> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmd-beta mailing list
>> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
dmd-beta@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta