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

Bug#466277: [ocaml.mk] add the ability to install the API reference in a different package



Package: ocaml-nox
Version: 3.10.1-1
Severity: normal

The automatic generation of the ocamldoc API reference for -dev packages
looks into the installation directory of a given package.  Then it
generates the ocamldoc API reference and installs it in the *very same*
package on which ocamldoc has been invoked.

This is suboptimal since for large -dev packages the HTML API reference
can get quite big, and shipping it in a corresponding -doc package is
desirable. 

To this end, the ocaml.mk CDBS class should be changed so that the
target directory (or package) where the API reference should be
installed is customizable. Probably, just moving the "-d dir" flag used
to specify the HTML destination directory to a Makefile variable which
can then be overridden from debian/rules would be enough.

Cheers.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.24-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=it_IT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages ocaml-nox depends on:
ii  binutils            2.18.1~cvs20080103-1 The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii  gcc                 4:4.2.2-2            The GNU C compiler
ii  libc6               2.7-8                GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libncurses5-dev     5.6+20080203-1       Developer's libraries and docs for
ii  ocaml-base-nox [oca 3.10.1-1             Runtime system for ocaml bytecode 
ii  ocaml-interp [ocaml 3.10.1-1             OCaml interactive interpreter and 

Versions of packages ocaml-nox recommends:
ii  camlp4                        3.10.1-1   Pre Processor Pretty Printer for O
ii  file                          4.23-2     Determines file type using "magic"
pn  ledit                         <none>     (no description available)

-- no debconf information



Reply to: