On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 09:38:26AM -0400, Eric Cooper wrote:
> I'd suggest using the actual version with decimal point in the package
> name: ulex0.8 rather than ulex08. There's plenty of precedent in the
> archive.
Agreed, I did so. However, I did so only for the *source* package name,
not for the binary, since that would have been the first ocaml package
with a dot in the META name.
With that I have been able to rebuild pxp against ocaml 3.10 with the
combination of camlp5 and ulex08. All this is now in experimental (but
of course ulex08 will need to go through NEW processing).
Can please anyone maintaining packages which are potentially problematic
wrt the new camlp4 give them a try, eventually falling back to camlp5?
I feel we can start uploading to unstable soon ... comments?
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
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