Selon Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I'm pleased to hear that :-) > > Ok, i can do this way then, i would like to hear from Stefano first > though.
:-) > > > Also, to not let the suffix work i did get lost, i could release cvs > > > snapshot packagesusing this technics, and we can delay the move to it > > > to the next release. > > > > I think it should be discussed upstream first. > > It would be nice if snapshot libraries were also packaged using said > ocaml cvs snapshots. This would stress test the whole thing, and give us > good experience about how to handle this. It is currently possible. > > > I am still waiting for a apt/dpkg patch to fix the virtual packages > > > problem from Jerome :)))))) > > > > :) I can try to fix problems but I don't know what they are ;-) > > There is the source, and the exact problem is the one reported by > Laurent Bonnaud. apt-get build-dep bibtex2html does not find the > ocaml-3.06-1 package, and does not know about virtual packages. Usually, virtual packages cannot be used alone, you need: Build-Depends: real-package | virtual-package with real-package providing virtual package. This is the root of the problem methink: APT won't make any decision on what to choose. > I think the right solution is to make ocaml-3.07 a real package (maybe > provided by the ocaml source package) and have it provide the ocaml > package. This way it would be transparent for users, which do an apt-get > install only, and since nobody should use ocaml as build dependencies, > it should not be much of a problem. Mmm, i like this, it seems nice, We can always use the old way of build-depending. > altough i guess using ocaml as build dependencies would also have been > usefull, but could create dangers for the autobuilders when the new > ocaml is not yet ready. Anyway, it would still be nice to have apt fixed > for this. Policy requires what I explained about, so APT is not necessarily to be fixed. -------------- Jérôme Marant
