On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 06:53:38PM +0100, Stéphane Glondu wrote: > Hi, > > If I understand the Debian OCaml Packaging Policy correctly, .cma files > should be in libxxx-ocaml-dev binary packages. Has this choice been > taken with dynamic loading in mind? > > Ocsigen may, and does with its default configuration and in the most > useful cases, dynamically load nums.cma, sqlite3.cma, and cryptokit.cma, > the last two being in *-dev packages. However, I think this is > confusing: is it ok for an executable to depend on *-dev packages at > runtime? > > When OCaml with native dynamic loading is realeased, where so-called > "plugins" (.cmxs, I am not talking about .cmx files!) should be put? > libxxx-ocaml or libxxx-ocaml-dev? The second choice would be > meaningless, since .cmxs are only meant to be dynamically loaded. And > the first choice would be inconsistent with the current choice for .cma > files. > > Therefore, I think .cma files should be put in libxxx-ocaml binary > packages instead, or at least this possibility should be allowed and > explicitly mentioned in the policy.
Well, when the policy was written, ocaml dynamic linking was still a dream few foresaw happening in the near future. If ocaml dynamic linking is now going to happen, the policy should be adapted, and the separation will always be that whatever is needed at runtime goes into the * package, and what is needed only at build time, should go into the -dev packages. But you speak of it in the future ? Do you have an idea of when such a new release will happen ? The question being how far debian will be with the lenny release that it may be included or not. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
