Re: "weird" naming convention for ocamlbuild executables
On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 14:32 +0200, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
> On 6/16/07, Sven Luther <luther@debian.org> wrote:
> > I like this new solution too. The plain name (the optimized one), could
> > be made an alternative, or even better yet, we could implement
> > the scheme we used to speak about a bit in the past years, where a
> > alternative-like mechanism allowed for system wide selection of either
> > all native binaries, or all bytecode ones, or individual overrides for
> > selected executables.
Debian has little choice but to make executable with the same
names are Inria provides. Ocamlopt.opt is the native code version
of the native code compiler and that's it.
Debian isn't the only user of the ocaml compilers. Other people
write scripts that depend on the names Inria uses and Debian
must reflect that.
> > This would allow to try somehow embedding the version number in the
> > ocaml executables too, and so allow full parallel installation of ocaml
> > packages.
> >
>
> I would also like that parallel installation of ocaml (to ensure
> correctness of dependencies, and maximize availability of packages).
What is required is a virtual package mechanism, something like:
1. Concrete packages for ocaml-3.09, ocaml-3.10 .. etc
which do not conflict.
2. A single virtual package ocaml-latest which choses the
latest ocaml.
3. Virtual packages for ocaml-3.09, ocaml-3.10 etc which
DO conflict.
4. A single package for ocaml which choses the latest virtual
package.
SO .. you can install ANY SET of concrete packages.
If you install the virtual ocaml-latest, it upgrading it
installs a new concrete ocaml, but doesn't remove any old ones.
You can only install ONE virtual package from set (3),
but usually you won't, you'll install (4) instead.
Package (4) is the current status quo. You get the latest
ocaml only.
I'm not quite sure exactly how to structure this, the above
is just an idea.
As mentioned on the GHC mailing list .. look at how gcc works.
It supports both a default 'most current' version but also
any other version, including cross compilers.
--
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
Reply to: