On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:41:48PM -0400, Mike Furr wrote:
> >Fully agreed, but we can't do such a change "just" in Debian. We need to
> >convince upstream about that and I don't think it would be easy...
> I think we can do such a change. If we just provide foo instead of foo
> and foo.opt, then nothing should break. Just about everything that I've
> seen check for foo.opt gracefully falls back to use foo when its not
> available, so there shouldn't be any problems.
Good point actually.
But even if we won't break build systems we will slow down those build
systems which first check for .opt and then fallback to no extension.
So I think we should go ahead with this proposal only if paired with the
alternative mechanism or also just the symlink to the best version.
Still I must confess I'm a bit tired of routine work on the ocaml
package itself these days. I would like to devote my next ocaml
packaging time to the dependency stuff. So if someone step forward and
is willing to implement the alternative mechanism which can make
ocamlopt (and friends) point to either ocamlopt.byte or ocamlopt.native
then please go ahead. I have no objection in shipping that stuff as
Debian's ocaml 3.10.0.
Otherwise, if it's up to me I will preserve the current status quo, i.e.
following upstream convention. But that's just because I'm lazy right
now :-)
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature