From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA32358; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 21:10:18 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA32331 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 21:10:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA23206 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 15:23:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from isis.u-strasbg.fr (isis.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.200.1]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g5IDNwP15134; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 15:23:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.44.193]) by isis.u-strasbg.fr (8.12.3/jtpda-5.4) with ESMTP id g5IDNvpU078771 ; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 15:23:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lambda.u-strasbg.fr (lambda.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.90.63]) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA07829; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 15:25:15 +0200 Received: from luther by lambda.u-strasbg.fr with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17KJ6L-0007v0-00; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 15:32:53 +0200 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 15:32:53 +0200 To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Sven , Vitaly Lugovsky , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml packaging problems Message-ID: <20020618133253.GA30437@lambda.u-strasbg.fr> References: <20020430111657.A18782@pauillac.inria.fr> <20020430200405.A16880@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> <20020514105452.B11894@pauillac.inria.fr> <20020613155001.GA27493@lambda.u-strasbg.fr> <20020618145733.A21463@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020618145733.A21463@pauillac.inria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven Luther Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 02:57:33PM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > I am going to prepare a new ocaml debian package which will support what > > you suggest, but still be compatible with the current way of doing > > things (using the external ocaml-ldconf program). > > [description omitted] > > Looks good. :))) > > But there are two points i much would like a consensus being attained on : > > > > 1) What will be the exact name of these directories ? It would be a good > > idea, i think at least, if we choose the same name for all > > installations of ocaml, and not everyone choosing it's own directory. > > (or else we could have a ocaml option similar to -where which would > > give a pointer to these directories ? and have the choice of the > > directory highly configurable, maybe a -where_stub or something such ?) > > > > Actually i have the proposition of "shlibs" from you, and "libexec" from > > Gerd and the findlib people. and then i feel myself "stublibs" should be > > a nice name too, especially since it is just the sub libraries we are > > speaking about, and not the .cma and other such ocaml libraries. > > My proposal for "shlibs" was just for the sake of example, and isn't > very descriptive. I like "stublibs" or "libexec" better, actually. I would go for stublibs myself, but the findlib folk seems keen on libexec. Maybe we should have a long discution here on that, or you would decide and we keep that, i don't know, i would need more opinion on this. > > 2) I think it would be nice to distinguish two such directories, > > /usr/lib/ocaml/shlibs for distribution native libraries (the packaged > > ones that follow the rule), and /usr/local/lib/ocaml/shlibs for hand > > installed packages. > > Keep in mind that there is only one OCaml standard library directory. > So, non-packaged libraries tend to install in `ocamlc -where`/LIBNAME, > and would put their DLLs in `ocamlc -where`/stublibs. Hence, > I'm not sure the second directory /usr/local/lib/ocaml/stublibs > would be used a lot. But it doesn't hurt. Yes, altough findlib seems to be able to know about it and install thing in /usr/local/lib, if we need to. > On a related issue, to facilitate the transition from the current > scheme, it might be worth adding /usr/lib/ocaml as a third > directory, at least for the next two releases or so. We will keep the full separate directory stuff active in the meantime, /usr/lib/ocaml is one of those dirs anyway, so there should be no problem. > > And should these two dirs be hardcoded into the ocaml suite, (as are > > /usr/lib and /lib into the C ld.so) ? > > I don't think so. The hardcoding in ld.so seems to come from a desire > to facilitate disaster recovery: even if the ld.so cache or > configuration files get accidentally wiped, a reasonable number of > dynamically-linked utility programs still run. There is less to worry > about wiping OCaml's ld.conf file. Ok, ... But then, i would argue for some more switch for ocaml (an ocamlc -wherestubs or even a ocamlc -wherelocal) so that installation programs not using findlib can have a greater control on where to install their stuff. Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners