                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
Path: ge7ni75787802wib.0!nntp.google.com!feed-C.news.volia.net!volia.net!news2.volia.net!feed-A.news.volia.net!border1.nntp.ams2.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams2.giganews.com!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!94.232.116.11.MISMATCH!feed.xsnews.nl!border-1.ams.xsnews.nl!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!reality.xs3.de!news.stack.nl!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Giulio Paci <giuliop...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.devel.mentors
Subject: Re: packaging C interpreter
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 01:00:02 +0200
Message-ID: <jqdi2-19V-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <jpBcJ-7YX-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <jpBPs-8gH-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <giuliop...@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.4) Gecko/20120510 Icedove/10.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Approved: robo...@news.nic.it
Lines: 50
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robo...@news.nic.it
Bytes: 4173
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 21/07/2012 08:34, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Rustom Mody <rustompm...@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> I use and am interested in packaging the C interpreter
>> http://www.linuxbox.com/tiki/node/149
> 
>> 1. Its not under GPL but a 'creative licence'
> 
>>From the homepage, and the source, this 'creative license' appears to be
> the Artistic License, used by, for example, Perl. I do not think that
> will be a problem.
> 
>> 2. It build does not use autotools but make with small edits.  I guess I
>> could try putting it under autotools
> 
> Please don't do that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with not using
> autotools. If minor edits is all the upstream build system needs, doing
> that is far less invasive than replacing the whole build system.
> 
> Especially as there is no upstream to send the autotoolsification to,
> there is absolutely no need to do such an invasive change.
> 
>> 3. Its an old project
> 
> Now this is a bigger isse: with no upstream, possible bugs are all yours
> to fix. Are you willing and capable of acting as if you were the
> upstream author?

I think this issue is alleviated by the fact that someone seems to have
worked on this interpreter during the last year. Further information can
be found here:
http://eic-howto.wikispaces.com/

> I do not think a C interpreter adds any value,

I think a C interpreter can be useful if it can be embedded and
integrated into applications, as it allows for C scripting and quick
prototyping of functions, which can be both positive.

What are the benefits of EIC with respect to Tiny CC (tcc package) and
CINT (root-system package) that others have suggested?

Bests,
	Giulio.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQU...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/500C8543.3080...@gmail.com