[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Transition to OCaml 3.11.1... - and to /usr/lib/ocaml



On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 03:28:25PM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> I've updated the previous transition page:
> http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/OCamlTaskForce/OCamlTransitions

Eya, sorry for the delay. No problem with the transition, I agree with
the proposed plan.

However, I'd like to propose an extra item to take care of during this
transition. Namely: moving our standard library to /usr/lib/ocaml/.

The current choice of /usr/lib/ocaml/ABI/ is pointless. It was devised
to support multiple version of OCaml installed on a single system, but
we discovered that in the long run such a solution will not be
tenable. Partly because we don't have the manpower to do that, partly
because it is not in the OCaml developers "tradition": we all migrate
from minor release to minor release, without caring too much for the
old one.

The advantage of migrating to /usr/lib/ocaml/ will be that the path
will be *stable* and will not change from release to release. Also, it
would mean that stale old directories will not stay around due to some
bugs that hit us in the past.

Finally, doing the transition now will help in spotting packages that
are not using the appropriate variable in debian/rules, but rather
relying on hard-coded paths such as "/usr/lib/ocaml/@OCamlABI@/".

The only note of caution is that, on the contrary,
/usr/local/lib/ocaml/ABI/ should stay,
     ^^^^^
because manually installed libraries are not granted to migrate with
all other packages provided by the distro.

Cheers.

PS I'll be unable to work on packages I usually maintain until next
   monday.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: