Re: [camlidl
On Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:38:44 +0100 Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org>
wrote:
>SZ > Definitely I will prefer 1) also splitting camlidl and camlidl-doc
>SZ > (i.e.
>SZ > html doc in camlidl and ps, pdf doc in camlidl-doc).
>SZ >
>SZ > Opinions?
>SZ > Sven, what do you think about embedding camlidl in the ocaml package?
It may help you to know that like for camlimages ....
http://www3.inrets.fr/estas/mariano/MyDebian/Packages/Available/camlidl/
ready for adoption ;-)
there is something I delayed for today, the doc "problem".
The makefile (more exactly the tools) needed for the documentation
generation were not available on my laptop. So the doc/Makefile
is not called during the package building...
PS : I fact I made this package and camlimages one in the same time
but, well, everyone knows that 'rm' is a very powerfull command
but unfortunately irreversible ;-)
PS2 : for camlidl and camlimages, there is no problem for
me to remove my name from control and other files ... if it is more
practical for those who intend to adopt these packages...
cheers
--
# mailto:Georges.Mariano@inrets.fr tel: (33) 03 20 43 84 06
# INRETS, 20 rue Élisée Reclus fax: (33) 03 20 43 83 59
# BP 317 -- 59666 Villeneuve d'Ascq
# http://www3.inrets.fr/estas/mariano
Reply to: