On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 02:11:32PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > ... for you and for me and for all the debian ocaml user ... > > I'm going to start working again for debian related issues.
:))) > I would like to know what we (in fact you, cause I was practically on > vacation) have decided about dependencies and so on. I need to write down all the latest stuff in a new ocaml packaging policy, will try to this this weekend. > Mainly: > 1) on which version of ocaml should libraries depend on? I'm stuck with > ocaml-<version> schema The plan is to keep the ocaml-<version> depends. I will solve the virtual depends by uploading a new ocaml-3.06 source package which will provide packages including the version name instead of the old provides. This should make the autobuilders happy (i hope) and allow us installation of multiple simultaneous version of ocaml. I need to do some work on this yet (binaries, manpages and emacs/latex stuff are not up to it), but you can find preliminary packages in my http://people.debian.org/~luther/ocaml repository. once the mini-freeze is over, and the current (-15) ocaml packages have entered testing, i will upload it. Then, when it has been sucessfully rebuilt on all arches, i will upload ocaml 3.06-16, as a wrapper package depending on ocaml-3.06-1. I don't intent to provide wrappers for ocaml-base or ocaml-source. This is similar of how gcc does it, so i think it is ok for us also. > 2) am I wrong or we have decided to dismiss the Provides for libraries > interdependencies? This is less clear. There are various possibilities : 1) Do it like ocaml and the C libraries, and embed the version number in the package name. To be complete we should also somehow embed the ocaml version number in the names. shared C libraries do it that way. This is the most complete solution but may be a bit overkill, it enables multiple simultaneous versions to be available though and would greatly simplify the use of multiple simultaneous ocaml versions. 2) Continue using the provides as you suggested. Nice and easy, but the autobuilders are not happy. 3) Keep only one library name, and depend on libfoo (>> 3.4.5). This is the easiest, but does not work all that well when a new version of either the library or the ocaml package appears. It would be broken only upto re-upload of the dependent library though. 4) Don't care. Easiest solution, but does not really solve anything. I am of the opinion of writing in the policy document either 1) or 3), depending on the library maintainer. Or maybe a either 1) or 2)+3). Friendly, Sven Luther
