On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 06:28:48PM +0000, Richard Jones wrote: > Hopefully these packages should be slightly better. > > http://www.annexia.org/tmp/modcaml-src/ > > Dependencies are OK, although I can't work out how to force it to > depend on a particular version of OCaml (doing 'ocaml (= 3.07)'
Read the ocaml_packaging_policy document in /usr/share/doc/ocaml. The correct way of doing this is to build depend on ocaml-3.07 and depend on ocaml-base-3.07 for the runtime library and ocaml-3.07 for the -dev library. > The source code archive that it produces is all wrong. Huh ? > Not really sure which files need to go in the plain package, and which > in the -dev package, and whether it is worth having a separate Well the -dev is for the development stuff, while the plain package is the runtime package, what is needed to run modcaml built binaries. In normal packages with C bindings you put the dll.so in there only, but in your case you may need to put more stuff, apache related stuff maybe ? > -examples packages. The OCaml packaging policy suggests that the > current split is OK. Nope, put them in -dev. You could imagine having a modcaml-doc if you have loads of documentation, but i think it is not worth it. > Haven't fixed the native version so this would build correctly on > platforms without ocamlopt. Note that mod_caml doesn't ordinarily use > native executables, the reason being that it uses Dynlink for > everything and Dynlink only supports bytecode. However I do build / > use the Dbi modules separately, and so those are compiled natively for > now. Ok, ... Maybe you could post a small description on how your package is exactly to be used, especially the interaction with apache, and i can give you more advanced help on these topics. Friendly, Sven Luther
