Re: ocaml 3.09.0 and word from the RMs ...
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 05:02:48PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:56:07PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Ok, I have a clearer understanding now. I suddenly like this new
> > > implementation technique of our policy :-)
> > So, what do we decide on ? Two places where the abi number is hard coded, or
> > generating the debian/control dynamically ?
>
> From what I grasped from this thread I vote for your solution with the
> substitution in debian/control (BTW, which are the two places?). Still,
> I repeat, I haven't yet had the time to look in detail at your work, so
> take my words with some degree of uncertainity.
Well, i was wrong, obviously, there is only one, altough it is of two
different kinds.
ocaml itself has a hardcoded version number in debian/rules, which you set if
the abi changes.
the packages get this from ocamlc -version, so the only hardcoded one is the
build-depend in debian/control.
If we move debian/control to debian/control.in, we can then use the same
substitution for a debian/control target in the rules file. Let me adapt
lablgl to this scheme and so you can compare.
I hear that there is discussin for moving the libraries to the abi scheme
also, which would be reather neat.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: