Re: alternative proposals
Selon Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org>:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 04:25:58PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > > Jerome, Sven, please, don't be silly.
> > Hmm, I can discuss but I think I have no choice but accepting
> > what's going to happen. Should I still give my view?
>
> Yes, sure, but it seemed to me that the discussion between you and Sven
> was drifiting from our, common, goal.
Which is?
> > > Please explain what kind of compatibility we are going to break having
> > > as an invariant all symlinks pointing to the latest ocaml version.
> > You must make sure symlinks are there which is not possible when
> > they are provided by another package.
>
> I don't think so, let's try ...
>
> aren't alternatives enough for what we would like to do? We can just
> have each ocaml package providing an alternative for
> ocaml/ocamlc/ocamlopt/... with a priority number that is going to
> increase forever starting from an arbitrary value, say 10.
We must no use alternatives. There is no way to sync alternatives
for every binary. It is strongly not recommended (by GCC maintainers).
There is currently no way to group multiple binaries in a single
alternative.
--
Jérôme Marant
Reply to: