On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 09:42:44PM +0100, Ralf Treinen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 08:55:35PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Also, we could rename ocaml-base as ocaml-runtime, and have ocaml-base > > contain the interpreter. > > NO! Don't do it! We would have to change all packages that depend
Huh, forgot the smiley. > on ocaml-base. And it would be a big mess since the package > ocaml-base wouldn't provide any longer what it used to provide. > Please leave ocaml-base as it is. The runtime system is the > most basic part of the ocaml system, and it should keep its > name. Why not call the new interpreter package "ocaml-toplevel" > since this is what it provides? That sounds nice. It contains a bunch of .cmi and .cmas though. I guess it will not be needed to do a similar split for the other libraries, since if someone wants to use one of those as a script, he should depend on the full -devel file. Still waiting from response of Xavier on the bignum issue. Friendly, Sven Luther
