Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] RFC: FRS structure [Was: RFC: mingw-get package group hierarchies]

[Charles W. <cwi...@us...>]

On the whole, I agree with the spirit of Earnie's proposal for the
organization of the FRS.  More inline...

On 11/1/2011 4:15 PM, Earnie wrote:
> When looking at FRS/mingw/files IMO at most we should see
> 
> MinGW
> MSYS
> Other
> 
> I would use Other to move the current
> 
> Cross-Hosted MinGW Build Tool
> OldFiles
> mingwPORT
> UserContributed
> 
> directories to.

Fine by me -- with one possible exception:

"OldFiles" is not visible to non-members. It contains files we have
"deleted".  We probably should have a directory under "Other" that holds
packages/files which (a) we don't want to actually delete for some
reason (e.g. non-members can still see them for historical purposes?),
but (b) they should no longer be installed on any modern system.  Hence,
an additional "Obsolete" directory under "Other".

> Under MinGW and MSYS I would have
> 
> Base
> Contributed

I agree, with the understanding that "core" packages (e.g. supported by
us) which are not part of the minimal-install "Base" footprint) have
"package directories" directly under MinGW/ and/or MSYS/, as they do now.

Alternatively, those mingw.org-supported, but non-Base packages, could
live in a third subdir -- say 'Extension' or 'Adjunct' or 'Supplement'
(you, too, can have fun at thesaurus.com).

> 
> and those would contain the package directories.  We don't need any
> other complication of directory.

Yes.  The more I look at

MinGW/BaseSystem/GCC/
MinGW/BaseSystem/GDB/
MinGW/BaseSystem/GNU-Binutils/
MinGW/BaseSystem/RuntimeLibraries/

the more confusing I imagine it would be to a new user browsing the FRS.
 Aren't GDB and GCC GNU projects?  Why does libstdc++ live "under"
GCC/Version4/gcc-$ver/ but mingwrt lives "under" RuntimeLibraries? --
isn't libstdc++ a runtime library?

> MinGW
>  Base
>   binutils
>   gcc
>   libgmp
>   libgomp

Actually, I think "packages" (in the mingw-get sense) which derive from
a single -src (as libgomp derives from gcc*-src) should "live" in the
same directory:

    Base/gcc/gcc-4.6.1-2/
       gcc-4.6.1-2-mingw32-*.tar.lzma
       gcc-4.6.1-2-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma
       gcc-4.6.1-2-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma
       libgomp-4.6.1-2-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma
       etc.

=====> Never mind. You mentioned this below.

>   libiconv
>   libintl

    Ditto here; libintl is part of gettext/

>   libmpc
>   libmpfr
>   libpthreadgc

>   libquadmath
>   libssp
>   libstdc++

    Ditto; these three are all "part" of gcc.

>   mingw-get
>   mingwrt
>   pthreads
>   w32api
>   mingw-rt

>  Contributed
> MSYS
>  Base

IMO, the Base directory should contain the following:

bash
bzip2
msys-core << ??? name?
coreutils
cygutils
diffutils
expat
file
findutils
gawk
gettext
grep
gzip
less
libiconv
make
popt
regex
sed
tar
termcap
texinfo
xz
zlib

I arrived at this list using the following algorithm:
  1. Look in the msys-base meta-package.
  2. for each component listed, identify the corresponding -src package.
  3. ALL components for that -src will live under Base, even if only
     (e.g.) the dll is actually IN the msys-base meta-package -- for
     example, libintl-vs-gettext.
  4. For each package so selected, iterate through all of the related
     components' <requires /> elements, and repeat 2-4. (e.g. recurse).

With the possible exception of popt and cygutils, I think that's a
pretty good list that stays true to the original MinimalSYStem goals,
for a default installation.  It's not totally bare-bones (e.g. the
msys-tiny metapackage), but it doesn't pull in beasts like perl or vim).

(FYI, the only reason popt is pulled in, is because of
cygutils-dos2unix.  I'm considering asking Erwin to create msys-dos2unix
(and mingw32-dos2unix) from his upstream dos2unix project, which has
replaced cygutils-dos2unix in the cygwin distribution...then we could
remove popt & cygutils-dos2unix from "Base"...)

We've talked about "what goes into base" a couple of times in the past...

RFD: mingw-get & xml files: working notes for meta-package membership
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.mingw.devel/3784

mingw-get publication of msys-base -- phase 2
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.mingw.devel/4058

>  Contributed
> Other
>  Cross-Hosted MinGW Build Tool
>  OldFiles
>  mingwPORT
>  UserContributed
> 
> 
> The packages under each "Base" folder are based on a minimal set of
> packages in var/cache/mingw-get/packages after I installed gcc, g++,
> msys,


 msys-bison, msys-flex, msys-m4, msys-perl and msys-vim.

I wouldn't consider any of these part of the "base" msys install.  The
"msys-base" meta-package was defined explicitly to be relatively
minimal, and perl/vim definitely aren't.  Plus, flex, bison? Those are
rarely used unless building gcc.  m4...I could see that, but its main
client is auto*, and once you pull those in you'll get m4 (and perl)
automatically.

> Of course
> this probably missed something and also may have included a package that
> belongs under another folder (libstdc++) for instance.

Ah, right.  OK, ignore the tedious bits related to this, above.

--
Chuck