On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 08:43:46AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 10:21:49PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 01:17:04PM +0200, Samuel Mimram wrote: > > > A new version of ocaml (3.09.2) is available. Since the caml libraries > > > are binary-incompatible between releases, this means that we have to > > > rebuild all the caml libraries before caml can hit testing. Do you see > > > any problem if we start a transition to ocaml 3.09.2? > > It's not clear to me whether there would be problems. Please hold off on > > starting this transition until we have a handle on which packages need to be > > updated to go into etch for the X11R7 transition; I don't *think* any > > ocaml-using packages are affected, but better safe than sorry. > I also don't remember any ocaml packages which where in /usr/X11R6 and co, > altough we have a few packages which do depend on X (labltk, lablgtk2, etc). > There is the issue of the rpath though, which is removed for some packages, > but maybe not for all, and which by default sets the rpath to /usr/X11R6 > stuff. > Maybe we should make sure 3.09.2 has no rpath at all, or move this rpath to > /usr/lib or something ? Packages should ideally have no rpath at all, as mentioned by policy. If this is too difficult to achieve, an rpath of either /usr/X11R6/lib or /usr/lib should be mostly harmless. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature