On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 05:48:07PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > Yes, sure, but it seemed to me that the discussion between you and Sven
> > was drifiting from our, common, goal.
> Which is?
Uhm ... let me think ... perhaps distributing the better ocaml packages
possible?
> We must no use alternatives. There is no way to sync alternatives
> for every binary. It is strongly not recommended (by GCC maintainers).
Uhm I didn't know that, do you have a pointer?
> There is currently no way to group multiple binaries in a single
> alternative.
Yes sure, but I guess that a sysadm changing the alternative only for
ocamlc and not for ocamlrun is probably not aware of what he's doing and
he probably deserve the obtained results ...
Anyway let's consider the other idea, what have you against an
additional binary package providing only the symlinks (the python way)?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -- Master in Computer Science @ Uni. Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} - http://www.bononia.it/zack/
" I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I am not
sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant! " -- G.Romney
Attachment:
pgpsN7nDF5b0f.pgp
Description: PGP signature