Re: patch - add an ocaml-interp binary package
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 09:22:45AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 07:35:30AM -0800, David Fox wrote:
> > but this requires the ocaml package, which pulls in lots of development
> > libraries like libc6-dev which we don't want on our normal system. I
> > developed the attached patch to 3.06 which splits out an ocaml-interp
> > package, it would be great for me if this was made part of the normal
> > packaging. I think it would help promote ocaml as a Perl alternative.
>
> I like the idea, I also use often ocaml as an interpreted script
> language.
>
> Anyway I'm wondering if it's better to ship a new ocaml-interp package
> or move the stuff you mention in your patch from ocaml to ocaml-base ...
> Moving the stuff shouldn't break anything since packages depending on
> ocaml-base still have in it all they need as well as package needing
> ocaml (since it depends on ocaml-base).
>
> Ocaml-base is suppose to separe the stuff needed to execute an ocaml
> "program" from the stuff needed to compile an ocaml source. Just extend
> our meaning of program from bytecode to script ...
>
> Ok, now is your turn to point me to the drawback of my proposal.
Well, the main turning point is that ocaml as interpreter stays a
marginal thing, and adding the toplevel and its libs will make
ocmal-base bigger, maybe too big ?
ocaml-base installed size is 400Ko, while the interpreter stuff is above
3Mo.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: