Re: Greetings!
On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 11:54:03AM -0700, Brent Fulgham wrote:
> > > How should such a library be named? libx11-ocaml, perhaps?
> >
> > or maybe libocaml-x11 ?
> >
>
> Based on the naming convention used for other libraries:
>
> libcompress-zlib-perl_1.08-1.deb
> libcurses-perl_1.02-3.deb
> libwww-perl_5.48-1.deb
> libxml-parser-ruby_0.5.16-2.deb
>
> I think policy indicates libx11-ocaml. Does that sound okay
> to you guys?
>
> > > Agreed. How should we divvy it up? I've already gotten some work
> > > done on efuns:
> > >
> > > efuns (editor)
> > > libx11-ocaml (x11 library)
> > > gmwm (window manager)
> > >
> > > Who wants to tackle some of these others? The more libraries and
> > > utilities are available, the better the acceptance and use will be.
> >
> > Package them first, then later one we can go for the others.
> >
> Okay. I'll try to upload today/tomorrow.
>
> > Georges Mariano was maintaining a list of potential ocaml
> > packages. so we can add it, better yet would be a dynamic web
> > page where you can register and comment on various packages.
> >
> Sounds like a great idea.
>
> > > Maybe the efuns module loader code as an ocaml utility?
> > > I'm not sure how general-purpose it is yet. I believe it
> > > allows C programs to load and run OCaml bytecode.
> >
> > Is this not included in ocaml ? It would be really usefull.
> > Is it uptodate with ocaml 3.00 ? what does the author say about it ?
> >
>
> Right -- I'm not sure. From the README:
> "
> The Efuns package contains:
> - The Xlib library for Ocaml (complete emulation of the C Xlib library)
> - The Dynlink library for native code (allow you to dynamically load
> cmo files in native programs).
> - The Toplevel library (allow you to evaluate ocaml expressions inside
> any program as in the toplevel).
> - The Gwml Generic Window-Manager (a wm configurable in Ocaml).
> - The Efuns Emacs clone editor (an editor configurable in Ocaml).
> - The wXtoolkit (a toolkit of widgets based on Xlib)
> "
>
> It appears that everything works with the 2.0 series of OCAML. I did
> compile Efuns under 3.0 without problems, and it seems to work quite well.
> Efuns links to the dyneval code, so that part is functional as well. I
> suspect any "new" 3.0 stuff may not be supported.
Please, remember to use 3.0 for any package you upload (for woody, 3.0 will be
default).
> I'm going to send the author a note (he seems to be an INRIA person as
> well) to see if I've understood everything.
Yes, i think he ius also or at least was from INRIA.
> It certainly seems like the dyneval code would be an excellent addition to
> the OCaml core distribution. It would make embedding OCaml in other
> programs much easier.
Yes, that is true, ...
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
Reply to: