From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p43MWKAW024136 for ; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:32:20 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al0EAH+BwE2K54gDgWdsb2JhbACEUaFPFAEBFiYltGaRGoEqg1eBAQSPGIQaiho X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,311,1301868000"; d="scan'208";a="82269872" Received: from rouge.crans.org ([138.231.136.3]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 04 May 2011 00:32:15 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost.crans.org [127.0.0.1]) by rouge.crans.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEF0B83A0; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:32:14 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crans.org Received: from rouge.crans.org ([10.231.136.3]) by localhost (rouge.crans.org [10.231.136.3]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 7v-mq1A5dhH9; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:32:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.39.1] (fbx.up7.fr [88.185.141.188]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rouge.crans.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71EE982E7; Wed, 4 May 2011 00:32:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4DC0826C.6060101@glondu.net> Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 00:32:12 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?U3TDqXBoYW5lIEdsb25kdQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110402 Icedove/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gerd Stolpmann CC: Mehdi Dogguy , caml-list@inria.fr References: <1304444979.3782.154.camel@thinkpad> <4DC06ADA.9030108@pps.jussieu.fr> <1304459989.3782.193.camel@thinkpad> In-Reply-To: <1304459989.3782.193.camel@thinkpad> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 OpenPGP: id=49881AD3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by walapai.inria.fr id p43MWKAW024136 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Warning: Ubuntu 11.04 Vs OCaml 3.12.0 Le 03/05/2011 23:59, Gerd Stolpmann a écrit : > Well, Ubuntu is another case, as we all know that Ubuntu does not care > about the quality of their ocaml packages. > [...] > Debian is in the lucky situation that they provide both the environment > for ocaml and ocaml. So yes, they can fix the problems they created in > their own environment :-) - Ubuntu is already a different story, they > provide binary packages without any QA process. > [...] > Regarding Ubuntu, maybe we should ask them to remove their ocaml > packages from their distribution as long as they do not do QA. You sound like ocaml-related packages are totally broken in Ubuntu, which is not true. They probably do more QA than GODI, even on ocaml-related packages (e.g. frequent recompilations with new versions of toolchain, early bug reporting when something breaks). But as you pointed out, they have complete control over their OS... it would be more difficult to do that for GODI. Sure, Ubuntu doesn't have a dedicated ocaml maintainer, and copy their packages directly from Debian and they should work most of the time (actually, I've never heard of breakages that were specific to Ubuntu). BTW, the ocaml package shipped by Ubuntu 11.04 has been fixed (it's still version 3.11.2, though). The original mail of this thread was about an ocaml compiled from sources. Cheers, -- Stéphane