On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:18:24PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote: > > Other problems are : > > > > ocamldoc.sty (a simple alternative should do it). > > alternative would mean prioritise ocaml versions.
No, you can call update-alternatives in the ocaml dummy package. This way the user can easily change the alternatives if he need to (i may even provide a script or something such). Alternatives is the right way of doing symlinks without breaking a lot of stuff. I even already do so for the caml includes files. > > emacs mode (should install in a subdirectory and provide alternatives ?) > > Hmm, we can put it in a separate package ocaml-mode and only one ocaml-mode > would be allowed to be installed at a time. I don't know, i am no emacs specialist. Ralf, what do you think of it ? > > In the meantime is it more important to fix the remaining bugs and other > > problems that stop ocaml from entering testing. > > Damned testing. Why, it will help us to do more experimenting while having a fallback in case of problems. > >> So I fear that we won't be able to reach our goal. > > > > Huh, do you believe i will not be able to achieve a nice working > > ocaml-3.06 package, which will be parallel installable ? I think it is > > possible, and as said, hope even to provide a patch upstream. I will do > > it in a clean way though. > > > > If this fails, no problem i can simply provide a ocaml 3.06-16 package > > with the latest fixes that went into ocaml-3.06 3.06-16. In fact i have > > such a thing almost ready. > > I think it would be wise to get our changes blessed by the OCaml team. Yes, sure, no problem i can handle that. BTW, can i ask you some question ? On your ibook, when you boot into MacOSX, is it easy to print .ps files ? Even if the printer doesn't know anything about postscript ? Friendly, Sven Luther
