From: Francois Berenger <mlists@ligand.eu>
To: "Stéphane Glondu" <steph@glondu.net>
Cc: "Daniel Bünzli" <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>,
"Ocaml Mailing List" <caml-list@inria.fr>,
caml-list-request@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh of them?
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 11:47:37 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed90d4ee7b4752814d49e705e8393afa@ligand.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <947dc3fd-50b3-28d4-c72e-64efc3d6f8de@glondu.net>
On 07/12/2018 22:22, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> Le 07/12/2018 à 08:31, Daniel Bünzli a écrit :
>>> The problem here is you've gone and invented a second package
>>> manager.
>>
>> The problem here is rather that the fragmentation around system
>> package managers renders the development of a consistent and
>> cross-platform package set like is being done in the opam-repository
>> largely undoable without an indirection -- the latter materializing as
>> these nth (sadly usually language specific) package managers.
>>
>>> Linux distros already have a package manager, used by users and
>>> developers alike. The package manager solves a whole lot of stuff
>>> like maintaining the whole system, dependencies, releases, security
>>> updates,
>>> mirroring and distribution, etc. Having a second one (and let's face
>>> it if you're using things like npm, cargo, etc., a third, fourth)
>>> complicates everything.
>>
>> It surely does.
>>
>> I suspect that if linux distributions had agreed on a single package
>> manager (or even metadata format and package **names**), if this one
>> had added a few developer friendly features (e.g. universes to easily
>> distinguish what you want to compile a project from what you want for
>> your system) and if it had been ported to other platforms we wouldn't
>> need all these language specific package managers. But that's a lot of
>> unfufilled ifs...
>
> If everybody had agreed on a single language, we wouldn't need all
> these
> language specific package managers either :-) Replace "language" by
> "operating system" or "platform" or ...
>
> Each package manager has its own set of features ("developer
> friendly"-ness is just a matter of taste IMHO)... You sound like system
> package managers have no features, but the example you give
> ("distinguish what you want to compile a project from what you want for
> your system") is supported by the Debian toolchain (and I guess
> others).
> I haven't been very much impressed by opam (I mean, the package manager
> itself) so far, actually there are basic features that are missing (or
> not obvious) in opam (such as redistributable binary packages).
Hello,
I asked a long time ago for this feature in opam:
"support for binary packages"
https://github.com/ocaml/opam/issues/1159
Note that, as Richard just suggested, if opam was able to synthetize
package descriptions for rpm/deb, we would gain binary packages for
free.
Regards,
F.
--
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives:
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list https://inbox.ocaml.org/caml-list
Forum: https://discuss.ocaml.org/
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-11 2:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-26 10:14 Oliver Bandel
2018-11-26 16:41 ` Yawar Amin
2018-11-26 16:57 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-26 17:15 ` Yawar Amin
2018-11-26 20:33 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-26 20:47 ` Yawar Amin
2018-11-26 20:54 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-26 21:19 ` Yawar Amin
2018-11-26 21:29 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-26 22:16 ` SP
2018-11-27 5:24 ` Malcolm Matalka
2018-11-28 0:20 ` SP
2018-11-27 6:11 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-27 8:45 ` SF Markus Elfring
2018-11-28 0:04 ` SP
2018-11-27 9:27 ` SF Markus Elfring
2018-11-27 10:08 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-27 10:28 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enough " SF Markus Elfring
2018-11-27 10:34 ` Julia Lawall
2018-11-27 11:05 ` Jean-Francois Monin
2018-11-27 11:00 ` Kakadu
2018-11-27 13:18 ` Malcolm Matalka
2018-11-28 1:52 ` Francois Berenger
2018-11-28 15:21 ` Ian Zimmerman
2018-11-27 13:07 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh " Jean-Marc Alliot
2018-12-06 12:21 ` Richard W.M. Jones
2018-12-06 16:10 ` Yawar Amin
2018-12-06 20:18 ` Richard W.M. Jones
2018-12-07 7:31 ` Daniel Bünzli
2018-12-07 7:44 ` [Caml-list] What happened to the 'ancient' library for OCaml? Francois Berenger
2018-12-07 8:24 ` Richard W.M. Jones
2018-12-07 8:26 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh of them? Richard W.M. Jones
2018-12-07 9:01 ` Daniel Bünzli
2018-12-07 13:22 ` Stéphane Glondu
2018-12-08 0:58 ` Daniel Bünzli
2018-12-13 23:45 ` SP
2018-12-11 2:47 ` Francois Berenger [this message]
2018-12-07 13:12 ` Malcolm Matalka
2018-11-27 14:32 ` Anil Madhavapeddy
2018-11-27 14:35 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2018-11-30 15:23 ` Louis Gesbert
2018-11-26 22:44 ` Jaap Boender
2018-11-26 22:55 ` Simon Cruanes
2018-11-27 13:29 ` Oliver Bandel
2018-11-27 13:45 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation tools - not enough " SF Markus Elfring
2018-11-27 15:06 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh " Simon Cruanes
2018-11-27 15:49 ` Oliver Bandel
2018-11-27 16:27 ` Daniel Bünzli
2018-11-27 17:46 ` Jaap Boender
2018-11-28 11:47 ` Jeremie Dimino
2018-12-01 15:12 ` [Caml-list] How to start with the curren toolset? Hendrik Boom
2018-12-01 16:56 ` Ian Zimmerman
2018-12-02 15:27 ` Daniel Bünzli
2018-12-02 23:36 ` David Allsopp
2018-12-03 2:19 ` [Caml-list] let's give a try at opam-bundle Francois Berenger
2018-12-02 17:44 ` [Caml-list] confusing message in opam installer Hendrik Boom
2018-12-02 17:50 ` Julia Lawall
2018-12-05 19:07 ` Raja Boujbel - OCamlPro
2018-11-27 16:27 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation tools - not enough of them? SF Markus Elfring
2018-11-27 17:09 ` [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh " Markus Mottl
2018-11-30 12:41 ` [Caml-list] <DKIM> " Vu Ngoc San
2018-12-07 15:19 ` [Caml-list] " oliver
2018-11-27 16:52 ` Hendrik Boom
2018-11-27 14:11 ` Jaap Boender
2018-11-27 2:33 ` Francois Berenger
2018-11-27 13:31 ` Oliver Bandel
2018-11-27 13:40 ` John F Carr
2018-11-30 16:31 ` Louis Gesbert
2018-12-01 5:01 ` Louis Roché
2018-12-03 0:16 ` Edwin Török
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ed90d4ee7b4752814d49e705e8393afa@ligand.eu \
--to=mlists@ligand.eu \
--cc=caml-list-request@inria.fr \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch \
--cc=steph@glondu.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).