On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:54:30AM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> I wonder: is liquidsoap really concerned by the transition ? It
> only depends on ocaml packages on build, so it shouldn't block any
> transition. I see this is the same at least for freetenis.
If this is true, it does not concern the transition indeed, at least
not with the current migration rules (i.e., britney's implementation).
Nevertheless I wonder how that can be true, how about your executables
on non-native archs? Either they are bytecode (and then must entail a
dependency on ocaml-@ABI@) or you link them in custom mode (and then
you're using a practice that we deprecated a while ago [1]).
Cheers.
[1] even though I'm not sure it has been written down in our policy yet
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature