Re: Counter proposal for the multiple ocaml installed

[Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@free.fr>]

En réponse à Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>:


> >   Stating does not suffice, IMO. I'd prefer when upgrading forces
> >   the removal of packages (which happens on transitions), than
> >   breaking the system.
> 
> Even if i patch ocaml so that it displays a big fat warning each time
> the compilers or toplevel are runs ?
> > Package: A
> > Depends: B
> > 
> > Package: B
> > Depends: ocaml-base-3.06
> > 
> > Now, assume that you recompile B against ocaml-base-3.07.
> > 
> > Package: B
> > Depends: ocaml-base-3.07
> > 
> > And upgrading is still possible. But A will be broken.
> > How do you plan do handle such cases? 
> 
> This is clearly a bug in the A package. if it contains ocaml bytecode
> or
> is a library, then it should depend on ocaml-base-3.06 also, if not,
> then there should be no influence of rebuilding B with ocaml 3.07.
> 
> But then, maybe i am wrong, but think about it, what you are meaning
> here is that A depends on ocaml-base-3.06 without stating it
> explicitly.

  I didn't state it explicitely because whatever it depends on,
  since ocaml-base-3.07 does not conflict with ocaml-base-3.06,
  the problem remains.

> > ...
> > > > What is ~/ocaml/3.06 ?
> > > 
> > > It is for home installed libraries, for user not having writing
> rights
> > > to /usr/local.
> > 
> >   Well, we don't have to decide where the user will install personal
> >   modules in is home dir. He should modif the path himself. This is
> >   at least how it happens on unix systems.
> 
> Erm, yes, sure. But it would be nice to have an easy way of adding
> such
> a path automatically, without breaking things.

Don't know who's to decide.

--
Jérôme Marant <jerome@marant.org>
              <jerome.marant@free.fr>

http://marant.org