Re: "weird" naming convention for ocamlbuild executables
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:42:12AM +1000, skaller wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 14:32 +0200, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
> > On 6/16/07, Sven Luther <luther@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > > I like this new solution too. The plain name (the optimized one), could
> > > be made an alternative, or even better yet, we could implement
> > > the scheme we used to speak about a bit in the past years, where a
> > > alternative-like mechanism allowed for system wide selection of either
> > > all native binaries, or all bytecode ones, or individual overrides for
> > > selected executables.
>
> Debian has little choice but to make executable with the same
> names are Inria provides. Ocamlopt.opt is the native code version
> of the native code compiler and that's it.
I agree, we shouldn't deviate from the upstream naming scheme.
-Ralf.
--
Reply to: