Re: [Fink-devel] Question about packaging Poly/ML
On Mar 24, 2008, at 12:27 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote: On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:51 PM, John Ridgway wrote: Friends - Poly/ML is an implementation of the ML programming language. As such, it has an interpreter which basically just loads the Poly/ML library and runs it. It is possible to have a program that uses the Poly/ML library but doesn't need the interpreter. The current version of Poly/ML is 5.1. Poly/ML 4.1.4 is still out there, and may want to appear in Fink at some point. I would like to create package polyml5 and have polyml5-shlibs as a split-off of it. The problem is that libpolyml.dylib is at version 1.0.0 (or 2.0.0, I forget which), not 5-something, and this seems to violate the Fink packaging guidelines. Can anyone help me out of my conundrum? It would seem very odd for package polyml5 at version 5.1 to have polyml- shlibs at version 1.0.0 as a SplitOff. I would really like to get Poly/ML into Fink so I can get Isabelle into Fink as well. Peace - John The name of the base package and the -shlibs don't actually have to agree. The -shlibs splitoff should be numbered by the compatibility version of the library. By policy, the -shlibs package for Poly/ML 5.1 would need to be polyml1-shlibs or polyml2-shlibs, depending on what the version of the library actually is. You could, however, leave its shlibs splitoff as polyml-shlibs, since it's the first shared library package for a polyml* package. For that matter, if Poly/ML 5.1 is the first such package in Fink, you can just call it polyml. Then if Poly/ML 4.1.4 is added to Fink at some point, it can be called polyml4, and its shared library package would be polymlN- shlibs, where N corresponds to its compatibility version. One question, though: would the library packages ever be used by anything else, or just by polyml? If the latter, then you don't even have to have a splitoff. I will want polyml4, and I suspect that polyml6 will appear in the future, so I'm inclined to go with the polyml5 name at this point. So polyml5.info would be for Poly/ML version 5.1 and would have a SplitOff of polyml2-shlibs. What version would polyml2-shlibs have? It would seem from the packaging guidelines (don't change the version in a SplitOff) that it should also be at 5.1. I'm just trying to get this clear. And, yes, the library could be used by other things than polyml5. Peace - John - Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about packaging Poly/ML
On Thursday 27 March 2008 03:05:14 pm John Ridgway wrote: On Mar 24, 2008, at 12:27 AM, Alexander Hansen wrote: On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:51 PM, John Ridgway wrote: Friends - Poly/ML is an implementation of the ML programming language. As such, it has an interpreter which basically just loads the Poly/ML library and runs it. It is possible to have a program that uses the Poly/ML library but doesn't need the interpreter. The current version of Poly/ML is 5.1. Poly/ML 4.1.4 is still out there, and may want to appear in Fink at some point. I would like to create package polyml5 and have polyml5-shlibs as a split-off of it. The problem is that libpolyml.dylib is at version 1.0.0 (or 2.0.0, I forget which), not 5-something, and this seems to violate the Fink packaging guidelines. Can anyone help me out of my conundrum? It would seem very odd for package polyml5 at version 5.1 to have polyml- shlibs at version 1.0.0 as a SplitOff. I would really like to get Poly/ML into Fink so I can get Isabelle into Fink as well. Peace - John The name of the base package and the -shlibs don't actually have to agree. The -shlibs splitoff should be numbered by the compatibility version of the library. Now that I think about it, the install_name of the primary library (libfoo.N.dylib) is what you'd want to number the -shlibs and -dev by, rather than the compatibility version. (I inherited a package that uses the latter and so I've had sustained confusion on this issue) By policy, the -shlibs package for Poly/ML 5.1 would need to be polyml1-shlibs or polyml2-shlibs, depending on what the version of the library actually is. You could, however, leave its shlibs splitoff as polyml-shlibs, since it's the first shared library package for a polyml* package. For that matter, if Poly/ML 5.1 is the first such package in Fink, you can just call it polyml. Then if Poly/ML 4.1.4 is added to Fink at some point, it can be called polyml4, and its shared library package would be polymlN- shlibs, where N corresponds to its compatibility version. One question, though: would the library packages ever be used by anything else, or just by polyml? If the latter, then you don't even have to have a splitoff. I will want polyml4, and I suspect that polyml6 will appear in the future, so I'm inclined to go with the polyml5 name at this point. So polyml5.info would be for Poly/ML version 5.1 and would have a SplitOff of polyml2-shlibs. What version would polyml2-shlibs have? It would seem from the packaging guidelines (don't change the version in a SplitOff) that it should also be at 5.1. I'm just trying to get this clear. That's right. The version will be 5.1. And, yes, the library could be used by other things than polyml5. Peace - John OK, then what you could have is that the -dev and -shlibs splitoffs would be named polymlN-dev and polymlN-shlibs, where N refers to the libversion of the library package. The corresponding executable would be polyml4, polyml5, or polyml6. -- Alexander K. Hansen akh AT finkproject DOT org Fink User Liaison and Documenter signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. - Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about packaging Poly/ML
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alexander Hansen wrote: | On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:51 PM, John Ridgway wrote: | | Friends - | Poly/ML is an implementation of the ML programming language. As such, | it has an interpreter which basically just loads the Poly/ML library | and runs it. It is possible to have a program that uses the Poly/ML | library but doesn't need the interpreter. | | The current version of Poly/ML is 5.1. Poly/ML 4.1.4 is still out | there, and may want to appear in Fink at some point. I would like to | create package polyml5 and have polyml5-shlibs as a split-off of it. | The problem is that libpolyml.dylib is at version 1.0.0 (or 2.0.0, I | forget which), not 5-something, and this seems to violate the Fink | packaging guidelines. Can anyone help me out of my conundrum? It | would seem very odd for package polyml5 at version 5.1 to have polyml- | shlibs at version 1.0.0 as a SplitOff. | | I would really like to get Poly/ML into Fink so I can get Isabelle | into Fink as well. | | Peace | - John | | | | The name of the base package and the -shlibs don't actually have to | agree. | | The -shlibs splitoff should be numbered by the compatibility version | of the library. By policy, the -shlibs package for Poly/ML 5.1 would | need to be polyml1-shlibs or polyml2-shlibs, depending on what the | version of the library actually is. You could, however, leave its | shlibs splitoff as polyml-shlibs, since it's the first shared library | package for a polyml* package. For that matter, if Poly/ML 5.1 is the | first such package in Fink, you can just call it polyml. | | Then if Poly/ML 4.1.4 is added to Fink at some point, it can be called | polyml4, and its shared library package would be polymlN-shlibs, where | N corresponds to its compatibility version. | | One question, though: would the library packages ever be used by | anything else, or just by polyml? If the latter, then you don't even | have to have a splitoff. Following up after a look at the tracker item on this package: one way to check if this is a private library is if there are any header files. No headers generally implies that the library is private. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH58vPB8UpO3rKjQ8RAgoNAJ0VR2nE4aMdKBBY2QN5fuKS3Npz2gCgjhNP +ACnJOLJ5NBu5GjC3b6FraI= =JsMn -END PGP SIGNATURE- - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
[Fink-devel] Question about packaging Poly/ML
Friends - Poly/ML is an implementation of the ML programming language. As such, it has an interpreter which basically just loads the Poly/ML library and runs it. It is possible to have a program that uses the Poly/ML library but doesn't need the interpreter. The current version of Poly/ML is 5.1. Poly/ML 4.1.4 is still out there, and may want to appear in Fink at some point. I would like to create package polyml5 and have polyml5-shlibs as a split-off of it. The problem is that libpolyml.dylib is at version 1.0.0 (or 2.0.0, I forget which), not 5-something, and this seems to violate the Fink packaging guidelines. Can anyone help me out of my conundrum? It would seem very odd for package polyml5 at version 5.1 to have polyml- shlibs at version 1.0.0 as a SplitOff. I would really like to get Poly/ML into Fink so I can get Isabelle into Fink as well. Peace - John - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about packaging Poly/ML
On Mar 23, 2008, at 9:51 PM, John Ridgway wrote: Friends - Poly/ML is an implementation of the ML programming language. As such, it has an interpreter which basically just loads the Poly/ML library and runs it. It is possible to have a program that uses the Poly/ML library but doesn't need the interpreter. The current version of Poly/ML is 5.1. Poly/ML 4.1.4 is still out there, and may want to appear in Fink at some point. I would like to create package polyml5 and have polyml5-shlibs as a split-off of it. The problem is that libpolyml.dylib is at version 1.0.0 (or 2.0.0, I forget which), not 5-something, and this seems to violate the Fink packaging guidelines. Can anyone help me out of my conundrum? It would seem very odd for package polyml5 at version 5.1 to have polyml- shlibs at version 1.0.0 as a SplitOff. I would really like to get Poly/ML into Fink so I can get Isabelle into Fink as well. Peace - John The name of the base package and the -shlibs don't actually have to agree. The -shlibs splitoff should be numbered by the compatibility version of the library. By policy, the -shlibs package for Poly/ML 5.1 would need to be polyml1-shlibs or polyml2-shlibs, depending on what the version of the library actually is. You could, however, leave its shlibs splitoff as polyml-shlibs, since it's the first shared library package for a polyml* package. For that matter, if Poly/ML 5.1 is the first such package in Fink, you can just call it polyml. Then if Poly/ML 4.1.4 is added to Fink at some point, it can be called polyml4, and its shared library package would be polymlN-shlibs, where N corresponds to its compatibility version. One question, though: would the library packages ever be used by anything else, or just by polyml? If the latter, then you don't even have to have a splitoff. - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
