From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F09857EEAF for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:16:15 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=74.125.82.181; receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com"; x-sender="thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=74.125.82.181; receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com"; x-sender="thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-we0-f181.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=74.125.82.181; receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="thomas.gazagnaire@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-we0-f181.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtkBAPLT9VBKfVK1jWdsb2JhbABFgy6CRbgSFg4BAQEBCQkLCRIGI4IeAQEEAToGATgBAwwBBQVGNAEFARwGiBoDCQaaKY4kgQqFNicNh3gBBQyQS2EDm3eIfT+BWII/ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,475,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="168584692" Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com ([74.125.82.181]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 15 Jan 2013 23:16:15 +0100 Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id t11so33059wey.12 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:16:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=P3rvEMqwvaQ1vA62RFPeV5PFJYpFAsFMfOMwIdzGeww=; b=hT+Oqt9lB7C5UFRal2O80R3WHYIYcN6rh9oQtmEwJbMs7Py1Kp2YPxSQ6YN7IhTpxb BQIegPIKlJ9b9ZgO+elYiOKGRKp8LM3DOJSDr7KTyymmXhe8x0ZkqXcsfJoqZqEdY2wK yGXJkCFbWviawTNpB8Urx/+llcAvvXK5MFwXVPOInL9voLQp9nc4FxOF9ADtN9xBqslt CsoDzb3bKclHqZZXEjJhunrEbDEAE/2Y7IySLz/6qRENeBkz92s3aCiNJAOMM5Dvtkgd 6qY4REx9QF11OBNP7A/UVMi4DpL5pPJRDi92qReXZiD5mj9hDY0J6f38tCUHPTnnDPCG h+eg== X-Received: by 10.194.177.199 with SMTP id cs7mr144594889wjc.41.1358288174769; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:16:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.101.47.25] (zone6.robinson.cam.ac.uk. [131.111.236.121]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u6sm5862881wif.2.2013.01.15.14.16.13 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:16:14 -0800 (PST) Sender: Thomas Gazagnaire Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Thomas Gazagnaire In-Reply-To: <32663755125844939AE6DD248CD6462A@erratique.ch> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 22:16:14 +0000 Cc: Anil Madhavapeddy , OCaml mailing-list , Mirage List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0C31A404-8816-470E-A4FA-2A55E27D6977@ocamlpro.com> References: <6833F17C-B642-4ED9-8C8F-2665A9742845@ocamlpro.com> <3764589D-EC12-4CD5-A76F-A009BE2DDE8E@ocamlpro.com> <32663755125844939AE6DD248CD6462A@erratique.ch> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: [ANN] beta-release of OPAM >> To people already using OPAM, I forgot to mention that it is highly reco= mmended to NOT upgrade opam using opam. The auto-update thing was a mistake= at the first place. It is also advised to start from a fresh opam init. It= should work if you don't, but it would definitely avoid some confusions in= some corner-cases. >=20 > But we agree there's no problem in compiling the new opam binary with an = opam install remove ~/.opam and then restart with a fresh init with the new= binary ?=20=20 The issue with 'opam update opam' is that this installs the opam binary in = ~/.opam//bin. If you manually move the new opam to a safe place (sa= y in /usr/local/bin) before removing ~/.opam, yes that should be fine. -- Thomas