Re: [Caml-list] man, doc, … and opam

["Daniel Bünzli" <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>]

Le lundi, 8 juillet 2013 à 10:56, Thomas Gazagnaire a écrit :
> This is not totally true. ocamlfind also install all the C stubs in `DESTDIR/stublibs/dllPKG.so` and this is not removed automatically by OPAM (as it currently has no good way to know the library name used by ocamlfind). So, in this case, `ocamlfind remove PKG` does a bit more than removing DESTDIR/PKG.

Aha ok, spoke too fast.  

> Indeed, no build system currently supports this. At one point, we've started to discuss the integration with oasis, obuild and ocp-build (with Sylvain, Vincent and Fabrice), but currenlty none of these systems has implemented that feature yet.  
For myself, I do have simple requirements, my packages being mostly pure OCaml. However I do need to scale horizontally, I have many packages developed, documented, maintained and formally released and I have an absolute *hate* for administrative duties.

I now decided to eschew each of these solutions (tested all of them) as none in the current state is able to fullfill my needs in a satisfying way -- both technically and from a usability point of view. For the curious see here [1] for how I plan to proceed from now on, at least until something *really* good emerges.

However now that I decided to go the ocamlbuild only + install file route for pure ocaml packages it would be nice if there was a way for ocamlbuild to tell us, given an .mllib (or .itarget) file, all the installable artefacts it *might* generate as it does actually have that knowledge and I'd prefer not to reencode it my scripts. I do it purely manually for now (see the links from the message [1]) it's not too bad, but I'd prefer having a simpler way so that I'm sure I don't miss anything (also if new build artefacts may appear in the future like cmxs did).  
  
> The `.install` mechanics is not perfect yet (the file needs to be at the root of the directory, and needs to be called PKG.install, where PKG is the OPAM package name) but I've waited for feedback before improving this.

As I said on opam-devel I don't think these requirements are that bad.

Best,

Daniel

[1] http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/opam-devel/2013-July/000161.html