On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Louis Gesbert <[email protected]> wrote: > > Wow! So non-OCaml OPAM is already a reality ! :) (not counting Coq here, > which sits on top of OCaml) > One point for "agnosticity" ! > >
Just noting, I also experimented with non-OCaml opam repos, for C/C++ crappy software: https://github.com/smondet/bfx-opam-repo - for exectuables to “see” libraries, I needed the LD_LIBRARY_PATH hack in the README - to avoid compiling OCaml, I had to create that “fake” compiler > > - Ashish Agarwal, 21/12/2014 10:22 - > > > Having a way to have multiple versions of the same library installed in > > the same switch could be very cool as well > > > > For websites, I need to pull in various Javascript libraries and CSS > > frameworks, which I can copy into my repo manually or manage with > something > > like Bower. However, I'd rather have everything via opam, so I started a > > repo for this [1]. The files of these packages are simply copied at build > > time, and thus there's no reason I couldn't have multiple versions of > > jquery installed at the same time. (I appreciate this is not a priority > use > > case.) > > > > [1] https://github.com/solvuu/opam-repo-web > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Daniel Bünzli < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Le dimanche, 21 décembre 2014 à 14:26, Peter Zotov a écrit : > > > > > > > Through ocamlfind, of course, there's nothing else now. > > > > > > > > Sure. But note that ocamlfind explicitly refuses to deal with > versioning > > > > constraints; it's even in the manual. So the dependencies of neither > > > > A.1 nor A.2 are not expressible in META. > > > > > > That's the point, I'm not asking ocamlfind to resolve any versioning > > > constraints. It's all based on the name of the package (if . is not > allowed > > > in the name then substitute by another character). With this packages > are > > > able to specify a dependency on a particular version. > > > > > > I don't see that as a long term solution; I hope we can eventually get > rid > > > of that hideous naming resolution hydra and menagerie of meta files we > have > > > now (which basically means ocamlfind should go). However I suspect > that the > > > underlying mecanism (install each package in PKG.VERSION directory) > will be > > > similar for whatever replaces the current mess, so there's no harm in > > > having it now. > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > opam-devel mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > opam-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel >
_______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
