[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: removal of the ocaml-source binary package

On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 12:04:20AM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> Cameleon package build-depends on it, a long time ago. I think it is no
> more needed (since ocaml-compiler-libs should do almost what is
> needed... but i am working on getting a more up-to-date list of library
> required).


> BTW, i am wondering why the ocaml-compiler-libs tree structure was flat 
> (one dir or something like that). Since all the files are coming from
> different dir, it should be better to imitate the tree structure of the
> ocaml-source. This will have some nice side effect, like being able to
> make some package compile against ocaml-compiler-libs, just as if it was
> a fresh ocaml build source...

Uh? What do you mean? The OCaml module namespace is flat notwithstanding
how you shape the directory structure containing ocaml objects. Also, if
the appropriate META is available one doesn't have to care about -I
flags.  I *guess* the choice of not structuring in dirs is that the dir
names are rather "common" (like "typing") and open the flank to
filesystem clashes.


Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48)  Zack: e la demo dema ?    /\    All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15)  Bac: no, la demo scema    \/    right keys at the right time

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: