On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:45:14PM +0100, Jean-Francois Monin wrote: > I really don't see how ocaml and coq may depend on X (in the sense, I > suppose, if Xfree). Except, maybe, for borderline things like emacs > mode ? Then they should be considered separately. CamlTk in another > story and is packaged separately I guess. I don't know about coq, but in the ocaml case, it is naturally the graphics module, which uses Xlib to do the drawing, i think. It is not so nice to remove it, since it is part of the libraries that come with ocaml. BTW, Does someone have more info about the curses dependency of ocaml ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- splitting the ocaml package ??? Sven LUTHER
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Stefano Zacchiroli
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Sven LUTHER
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Georges Mariano
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Claudio Sacerdoti Coen
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Jean-Francois Monin
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Georges Mariano
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??? Sven LUTHER
- Re: splitting the ocaml package ??... Stefano Zacchiroli
- Re: splitting the ocaml packa... Sven LUTHER
- Re: splitting the ocaml p... Remi VANICAT
- Re: splitting the oca... Sven LUTHER
- Re: splitting the oca... Remi VANICAT
- Re: splitting the oca... Ralf Treinen
- Re: splitting the oca... Sven LUTHER
- ledit and ile Ralf Treinen
- Re: splitting the oca... Stefano Zacchiroli
- Re: splitting the oca... Georges Mariano

