Re: [Caml-list] Library installation procedure (for use with OPAM)?

["Stéphane Glondu" <steph@glondu.net>]

Le 09/12/2013 18:37, Daniel Bünzli a écrit :
>> So, if everybody else have to implement them, opam's install files
>> become a new standard for the OCaml cummunity?
> 
> Frankly besides maybe wodi on windows I'm not so sure I see something
> reasonably competing with opam at that point, so that "everybody" may
> not include a lot of persons. Personally I don't have time to care
> for alternatives and I do what minimizes my admin/maintenance time at
> most.

You seem to forget all the system package managers (dpkg, rpm, ...).
While opam does have its advantages, it does not really compete with them.

>> Do most of us agree? (I'm not against it, I just don't want to rely
>> on 50 different standards).
> 
> I don't think it's a question of agreeing, usage will tell. Besides I
> don't see another standard, maybe `ocamlfind install` but it's
> limited in what it can install (and I hope that eventually the
> annoying two-headed structure ocamlfind/opam will disapear, e.g. the
> notion of ocamlfind package could be merged in the compiler).

The standard generic interface for package-manager-agnostic upstream
packages is:

  ./configure && make && sudo make install PREFIX=/foo

If people cannot agree on a standard implementation, at least they could
agree on the interface.

>> (A while ago, before opam, a new version of GODI broke on our main
>> platform because of some ocamlnet configuration bug, but I was able
>> to reinstall ocaml and about 25 third-party libraries and syntax
>> extensions from scratch without too much pain → we see great value
>> in that package-management independence)
> Why not. I guess you can see the value of having each of these
> libraries generating a .install file that you can process with a
> simple command line tool rather than have to deal with the
> idiosyncrasies of each custom (usually semi-broken) install
> procedure.

http://xkcd.com/927/


Cheers,

-- 
Stéphane