Re: fix the world, make it a better place ...
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:24:23AM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> En réponse à Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > > Alternatives are not such a right. Don't you remember
> > > the Perl mess using alternatives before Brendan O'Dea
> > > took it over?
> > I don't know, i don't really follow Perl stuff.
> > Could you summarize the dangers of using alternatives for us ?
> The danger is to have alternatives for different files pointing
> to different versions of programs.
> For example, imagine a mess with gcc pointing to gcc-2.95 and
> g++ pointing to g++-3.2.
Ok, i don't believe this would be such a problem, but anyway, that is
why i was thinking of doing a version changing script, which would wrap
all the update-alternative calls. This way, the user would only have to
call switch_ocaml <version_number> and automatically the right
alternatives for the <version_number> version of ocaml would be choosen,
It would be nicer if update_alternative supported alternative
meta-packages or something such though.
> This is the reason why the symlink solution without alternative
> is not used in gcc, for example.
Err, i think you wanted to say that is why gcc don't use alternatives
but simple symlinks ?
> > > Let's do it like Python.
> > How does python do it ?
> Only the greatest version of Python provides the emacs package.
> It is unversioned.
Mmm, ok. But the idea was _not_ to rebuild older versions of ocaml when
i upload the new one. Let me think more about it.