-
What does AST stand for?
AT&T Software Technologies.
In older distributions you may have seen
Advanced Software Technologies
or
Advanced Software Tools;
these originate from the name
our old Bell Labs department in the late 80's.
The department name has changed dozens of times since, but remarkably the
people involved haven't.
-
Is there a recommended installation directory?
Although there are no hard-coded pathnames in
ast
software, installing official releases in an
FHS
compliant directory like
/opt/ast
may lead to some uniformity when hopping from machine to machine.
See
/opt/ast
for details.
-
How do I read packages on an EBCDIC machine?
Follow the source or binary download instructions using the
ratz(1)
command to read the
INIT
package tarball.
ratz
recognizes three EBCIDIC variants and automatically converts each text
file tarball member from ASCII to the native character set.
-
Why does package read fail even though there are unread packages in
lib/package/tgz?
The default
.0000
base version was dropped starting on 2001-10-20, causing older
package(1)
commands to fail.
To get a new
package
command download the
INIT
package and manually read it in.
package read
should work again.
-
Why don't you use
rpm(1)
for packaging?
We are finally at the point where we can automatically generate
source and binary packages for any collection of software components that
are controlled by
nmake(1)
makefiles.
The
only
extra work is a manually edited per-package makefile that
lists the components in the package.
So, to answer the question, we understand makefiles, and with that
understanding we get packaging for free.
Now, see the next question.
-
Can you generate
rpm(1)
packages?
Yes, in theory.
The conjecture is that
nmake(1)
can produce the information needed by most of the popular packaging schemes.
The main problem now is for one of us to understand
rpm
details enough to do the transformation.
This will be done by the
package(1)
command.
It's documented but not implemented
(now that's a first around here.)
-
I just want
ksh(1);
why isn't there a
ksh
tarball?
Because of its popularity, you may now get just the
ksh
source by downloading the
INIT
and
ast-ksh
packages.
However, if you want the same build environment as ours, you should
download the
ast-base
package (that also includes
ksh.)
-
Why do you require more than one package in some cases?
All the software on this site is built on a common set of libraries.
We could have taken the GNU
*utils
approach and packaged a separate copy of the libraries with each
command tarball.
In our experience this leads to splintering that is
hard to undo, and we would end up with
n
slightly different copies of
getopt(3),
for example.
Instead we package the libraries once in the
ast-base
package.
ast-base
also includes
ksh(1),
pax(1),
and
nmake(1),
which are used to maintain and generate new packages and deltas (patches.)
BTW,
ast-open
contains all of our open source commands, so you don't need
ast-base
if you download
ast-open.
Other AT&T Labs Research packages that require
ast-base
will be posted in 2004,
including
CIAO
and
graphviz.