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

Re: Counter proposal for the multiple ocaml installed



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

> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 07:50:14PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> 
> Ok, now i have read your coounter proposal.
> 
> >   Since I don't agree with what has been proposed so far,
> >   I'm going to propose something else:
> > 
> >   - only one stable version of OCaml in the archive so
> >   we don't have to change anything
> 
> Mmm, this one doesn't really convince me, but let's say we use this ?
> 
> >   - possible ocaml-cvs snapshot would be installed in
> >   /usr/lib/ocaml-cvs/bin
> >   /usr/lib/ocaml-cvs/lib/ocaml
> >   /usr/lib/ocaml-cvs/share
> >   and so on.
> 
> And why not /usr/lib/ocaml/cvs ?
> 
> >   and we tell people in the README.Debian that they have to
> >   look for the compiler in /usr/lib/ocaml-cvs/bin (everything
> >   else will work fine sine compilers will have everything pointing
> >   to this toplevel directory)
> 
> This is awkward and ugly. Why not put the binaries in

  Yes it is :-) It took me one minute to write it :-)
  But, you know, we're not discussing name schemes here.
  It is a bit more serious.

> /usr/bin/ocamlc-cvs or something such ?
> 
> Please reread your counter proposal, and you will see that it is not a
> very serious proposal.

  It is not serious at all in its implementation, of course.

> The main point is that you don't want more than one ocaml installed,
> and
> are using somewhat lame solution for justifying it, no offense meant,
> but if you look again at your proposal, i suppose you will agree with
> me.
> 
> Now, let's suppose the following :
> 
>   - We only have one official suite of ocaml installed. (same as you)

  If you guaranty that we'll never have more than one stable
  ocaml (for the reasons I explained in previous mails), then
  I'm OK with everything in your proposal.

  If this change is made in order to allow the installation
  of a CVS snapshot, it doesn't make any problem for me.

>   - We move the libdir to /usr/lib/ocaml/<version_number>
>   - If we package ocaml-cvs, the libdir will be
>     /usr/lib/ocaml/cvs-<date> and the binaries will go into
>     /usr/bin/<name>-cvs-<date>. We can even remove the date if needed.
>     Naturally, no libraries will be built for the cvs version of
> ocaml.

  Without the date would be better.

> Would this, if you compare it point to point to your proposal, not
> sound
> more clean and logical ?

  Under the conditions I mentioned, yes.

> The only difficulty is moving libraries to the new ocamllib dir, and
> this can be done by simply rebuilding the libraries with the new ocaml
> package. Since i will bump the ocaml-3.06 virtual package, it will not
> be possible for old libraries to install alongside this new package.

  Remember that Cameleon has not entered unstable yet.

> Total change for libraries :
> 
>   o need to change dependencies by bumping it to 3.06.1

Huh?

>   o need to rebuild the package.

Of course.
 
> Is this too much asking ?
> 
> That said, even if we don't have multiple versions of ocaml installed,
> then we still gain by doing this, in making things easier for the
> people
> hand installing stuff.

I agree.

Cheers,

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

http://marant.org



Reply to: