Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 20:01 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> So my question: If I'm packaging ocaml-calendar (a library) then should
> the parts which make the above possible go into the main package or
We've already determined that OCaml is ... special.
Thanks for your prompt reply!
Here's the rule of thumb I've always used:
In the traditional library/binary model:
The main package is for libraries and components that another binary
would need to execute. I can't _run_ foo without libbar.so.6 being
The -devel package is for headers and components that are needed to
build that binary. I can't _build_ foo without bar.h being present.
So, in the OCaml universe, I'd say those .cma files fall into the main
package, as I can't run _foo_ without those .cma files present.
In fact because OCaml binaries are statically linked to OCaml libraries
foo doesn't require anything to run.
The *.cma file is a bit more like a *.a file, but as ever the parallels
However by the sounds of it, it seems that everything should go in
-devel. Is it a problem if the main package is completely empty?
Note that I know absolutely NOTHING about OCaml besides what
I've been programming in OCaml nearly exclusively for 4 years, and even
_I_ don't know all the ins and outs of the various files used. Mostly
this stuff just happens. I had to 'strace' the toplevel running to see
which files it needed.
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in
England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903