Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I'll see in the next build. > > I will try to build it by hand, that would be enough, we don't need a > new upload (which may fail) to notice this.
I've just uploaded a fix. ... >> Then don't ship it unpacked. You can ship it as a tarball that would >> be located in /usr/src. > > This doesn't change anything. What's the problem, again? >> > And anyway, depending on the source is _not_ nice. Imagine a package >> > which would depend on the gcc sources. >> >> GNAT, the Ada compiler needs the sources of gcc 2.8.1 to build. >> It includes the whole sources of gcc 2.8.1 even if it is not part >> of the same tarball. So you can either build-depend on sources or >> include them, but it is the same this IMHO. > > And GNAT is currently orphaned, right ? In the WNPP pages yes, but someone is working on a new upstream release. But what are you trying to prove with this? >> > Also there is no guarantee that the ocaml-sources would be configured >> > the same way as when ocaml was built, which can lead to many problems. >> >> That is why shipping the tarball unpack is a good tradeoff. > > I don't understand, are you speaking the tarball of the whole ocaml > build tree ? It will be huge. The ocaml tarball. Not that huge, 2.5 Megs and arch:all, this is pretty small. >> For example, kernel patches need kernel source to compile. > > Well, sure, and kernel modules also. But i don't think that you can > compare that to the ocaml situation, at least if you ask me, you cannot. > > I think it is ugly for an app to do so. Alright, do what you want. I have enough. Bye. -- Jérôme Marant http://marant.org
