Bug#610835: Installing caml pulls in half the world
Le 23/01/2011 05:28, Juliusz Chroboczek a écrit :
> I realise I need a Caml compiler. So I say
>
> $ sudo apt-get install ocaml
> ...
> Need to get 25.7 MB of archives.
> After this operation, 87.2 MB of additional disk space will be used.
>
> The package is pulling in the Caml documentation, ledit, two different
> Caml modes for Emacs, and even CamlP4. Kinky.
In a clean squeeze chroot:
> root@korell:/# apt-get install ocaml
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> The following extra packages will be installed:
> fontconfig-config libexpat1 libfontconfig1 libfreetype6 libncurses5-dev libpthread-stubs0 libpthread-stubs0-dev libx11-6 libx11-data libx11-dev libxau-dev libxau6 libxcb1
> libxcb1-dev libxdmcp-dev libxdmcp6 libxext6 libxft2 libxrender1 libxss1 ocaml-base ocaml-base-nox ocaml-interp ocaml-nox tcl8.5 tk8.5 ttf-dejavu-core ucf x11-common
> x11proto-core-dev x11proto-input-dev x11proto-kb-dev xtrans-dev
> Suggested packages:
> tcl8.5-dev tk8.5-dev ocaml-doc libgdbm-dev tuareg-mode ocaml-mode tclreadline
> Recommended packages:
> ledit readline-editor camlp4 xterm x-terminal-emulator
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> fontconfig-config libexpat1 libfontconfig1 libfreetype6 libncurses5-dev libpthread-stubs0 libpthread-stubs0-dev libx11-6 libx11-data libx11-dev libxau-dev libxau6 libxcb1
> libxcb1-dev libxdmcp-dev libxdmcp6 libxext6 libxft2 libxrender1 libxss1 ocaml ocaml-base ocaml-base-nox ocaml-interp ocaml-nox tcl8.5 tk8.5 ttf-dejavu-core ucf x11-common
> x11proto-core-dev x11proto-input-dev x11proto-kb-dev xtrans-dev
> 0 upgraded, 34 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 4253 kB/23.2 MB of archives.
> After this operation, 75.8 MB of additional disk space will be used.
So I assume you install automatically recommended packages (the default
setting for apt) and suggested packages (not the default). Please don't
do that and then complain that too much packages are installed.
And by the way, if you don't care about graphical stuff, you can install
ocaml-nox:
> root@korell:/# apt-get install ocaml-nox
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> The following extra packages will be installed:
> libncurses5-dev ocaml-base-nox ocaml-interp
> Suggested packages:
> ocaml-doc libgdbm-dev tuareg-mode ocaml-mode
> Recommended packages:
> ledit readline-editor camlp4
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> libncurses5-dev ocaml-base-nox ocaml-interp ocaml-nox
> 0 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 1632 kB/9866 kB of archives.
> After this operation, 38.4 MB of additional disk space will be used.
And by the way, tuareg-mode is the most popular emacs mode for OCaml,
but still depends on ocaml-mode for some features. And if you have
another readline editor (e.g. rlwrap) installed, ledit is not even proposed.
> $ sudo apt-get install ocaml-core
> ...
> Need to get 63.7 MB of archives.
> After this operation, 227 MB of additional disk space will be used.
>
> Caml *core* is three times larger than plain Caml? That's depraved.
Well... maybe the name of the package is ill-chosen, but the description
should be clear: it is strictly bigger than ocaml. It is a meta-package
there for convenience, but you should definitely not install it if you
want finer control on what gets installed.
> $ sudo apt-get install ocaml-base
>
> This doesn't install a Caml compiler, it installs a Tcl interpreter
> instead. Perverts.
This is not supposed to install a Caml compiler. Please read the
descriptions. The Tcl interpreter is needed by the OCaml runtime for Tk
bindings. If you want only the non-graphical part of the runtime,
install ocaml-base-nox.
> $ sudo apt-get install --no-install-recommends ocaml-nox
>
> Oh, I should have thought of it earlier.
>
> --Juliusz
>
> P.S. Seriously, folks, I am grateful for the Debian packaging of Caml.
> No offense intended, even when I called you perverts.
I really should read entirely a mail before replying to it :-)
Thank you (I guess).
--
Stéphane
Reply to: