Re: About this ocaml versioning stuff
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 04:57:47PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Selon Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org>:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 03:19:59PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > > > We have ever spoken about symlink, that surely should be present and
> > > > provide backward compatibility with the current (3.06) situation. The
> > > How?
> >
> > I suspect I have been misunderstood. I didn't mean 3.06/3.07
> > compatibility. I mean that executing ocaml/ocamlc/ocamlopt/... will run
> > the latest installed ocaml tools.
> >
> > > > ocaml 3.07 package built by Sven has not yet them, just because it was
> > > > an experiment to try if it is possible to add the -<version> suffix.
> > > This is why it is wrong, since such packages do not provide the symlinks.
> >
> > You're right, indeed they are not meant to be uploaded (or at least I
> > wont agree on such an upload :-).
>
> I thought it was intentional not to provide them.
>
> > Take them as a first step toward the final solution that will be
> > uploaded, Sven has not much time to work on them and we are sharing
> > efforts. If you can add symlinks _now_ you can do it and we will have a
> > better package sooner :-PPPP
> > Otherwise we should wait for Sven to add symlinks stuff.
> >
> > > And if they provide symlinks, there is no point providing versioned
> > > suffixes.
> >
> > This is not true. Having symlink permits you to have installed at the
> > same time 3.06 and 3.07 ocaml versions and therefore permit the new
> > ocaml package to start walking toward the testing entrance before the
> > old one is removed.
>
> As far as I know, Sven intends to provide them in a separate package.
> This is the major disagreement. I once proposed that the symlinks
> be part of the latest version.
Ok, please start again, and explain me why. I understood why it is not
good to use alternatives, but plain symlinks with checking should be ok,
and if someone modify them by hand, bad luck to them, they are not
supposed or even allowed to do that.
> The other disagreement is about the versioned shebang line in
> the bytecodes.
Yep.
> > > Am I going to provide alternative ocaml packages ? };->
> >
> > I would rather prefer you to improve Sven's :-)
>
> If only my point was understood .. :-)
That is why we have this discussion.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
>
> --
> Jérôme Marant
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: