Re: [Caml-list] ocamlrun-<version> [was : Any idea about Ocaml 3.07 release date?]

[Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>]

On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:27:58AM +0100, Hendrik Tews wrote:
> Sven Luther writes:
> 
>    > I use Debian, but I never install the ocaml packages (sorry to
>    > admit that). Instead I install every ocaml version in its own
>    
>    BTW, why don't you use the packages ?
>    
> Because they are years behind. Until last week I had
> Debian/Potato. It comes with Ocaml 2.04 from November 1999! Now I
> upgraded to unstable (which is enough bleeding edge for me) and
> there I find 3.04 from December 2001.

That can't be, you upgraded to either woody or testing. unstable has
3.06, and the only reason it hasn't entered testing yet, is because it
was built with glibc 2.3.1, which is not (yet) ready for testing.

Stefano announced woody backport of the debian/unstable packages on this
list on September 22. These should work for either testing or woody. here
is the apt source he posted :

deb http://people.debian.org/~zack/ocaml unstable main contrib non-free

Just add it to your /etc/apt/sources.list before the standard sources,
and you should get all the ocaml 3.06 stuff.

I don't really know if a similar potato backport would be possible, it
would be a pain to maintain, and potato is really old as you may have
noticed, but i think maybe Georges Mariano did something such. If in
doubt, you can always try building the debian packages yourself, apt-get
source -b should allow you to do that.

Finally, you can try installing unstable stuff on a woody/testing box
with :

apt-get install -t unstable ocaml

but i guess this will pull in the new libc and tons of other stuff.

In conclusion, if you really run woody or testing, use Stefano's
backports, if you run potato, upgrade to woody, if you run unstable,
something is really wrong, since you should have the latest packages.

>    That said, you are aware that a bytecode executable built on your system
>    will not run on another system with ocamlrun placed in different place.
>    
> Yes. But this applies to the ocaml packages in the same way. I
> don't know any system administrator how would install ocaml under
> /usr/bin. 

Yes, this is a bit of a problem, i think.

Not sure, but it is always possible to run ocamlrun on it yourself.

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