On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:21:36PM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> > I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve here. The problem at hand
> > is "what other packages need to be rebuilt first because they also depend on
> > the same {library/runtime} package as the present package." That should be
> > solvable without adding any new fields at all.
> Sven is talking of one of the issue that i only have half explained...
> OCaml dependency between packages is an open problem. I am not sure that
> anyone has a good solution (tm) for now.
Yep, and this has nothing to do with what me and Steve were initially
discussing.
Besides, Steve is well aware of the OCaml dependency issue due to
discussions on that with me and Julien at the past DebConf. And yes, we
have what we believe is the LSS (Least Sucking Solution) for that but we
haven't yet had time to discuss it nor to port our current tools to
that.
But please drop this, it's getting more and more off-topic :)
--
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