Re: ocaml without X, how?

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 09:02:03AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Yeah, but should we tackle it now or postpone it due to the imminent
> release of sarge ? 

Tackle it now but keep it compatible with existing stuff, i.e. a
ocaml-base-nox.

> > The dependencies come from two parts of the ocaml standard library:
> > graphics and tcl/tk. I'm in favour of splitting them away from the main
> > ocaml package so that ocaml/ocaml-base could avoid the infamous
> > dependencies on X.
> 
> It could be done in common with the ocaml-toplevel split also we spoke
> about.
> 
> This would mean the following distribution : 
> 
> 
> ocaml-base : Depends on ocaml-base-nox
> ocaml-base-nox
> 
> ocaml-toplevel: depends on ocaml-base
> ocaml : depends on ocaml-toplevel

Whats the difference between ocaml and ocaml-toplevel?

> ocaml-native-compilers
> 
> I am not sure i believe that removing X from the ocaml compiler suite is
> worth it.
> 
> Alternatively, we could split the libraries out of the ocaml package,
> but again, is it worth the effort ?

Wouldn't the compiler work fine with ocaml-base-nox as long as no X is
used?

Is there a way to easily see if a ocaml bytecode needs X or not?
Something lintian could check or something that could be used like
${shlibs} to set the right Depends?

MfG
        Goswin