On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 03:12:39PM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote: > Stephano, if you read me, please try to convince Sven that it > is very ugly and hackish.
Well, in my opinion old "provides" solution was fine (for "ocaml" package only, not for libraries) but wasn't working with autobuilders. If a simple "empty" package provided in this way solve the problem it's ok for me. Ok, it's an hack, but we are hackers :-) Seriously, for the moment I'm happy with answers on libraries, ocaml package deps are a bit less important for the moment. Let's focus on testing transition. Anyway I can't see real motivations from you against this solution (assuming that I've understood it correctly cause I haven't yet seen the ocaml packages pointed by Sven). "It's an hack" isn't a real motivation for me. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli - Undergraduate Student of CS @ Uni. Bologna, Italy [EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} - http://www.bononia.it/zack/ " I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant! " -- G.Romney
pgpFdbqNTV7Ff.pgp
Description: PGP signature
