[opam-devel] OPAM Roadmap -- what next ?

Sebastien Mondet sebastien.mondet at gmail.com
Mon Dec 22 14:51:49 GMT 2014


On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Louis Gesbert <louis.gesbert at ocamlpro.com>
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 <
> daniel.buenzli at erratique.ch>
> > 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
> > > opam-devel at lists.ocaml.org
> > > http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
> > >
> _______________________________________________
> opam-devel mailing list
> opam-devel at lists.ocaml.org
> http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ocaml.org/pipermail/opam-devel/attachments/20141222/ffa3b728/attachment.html>


More information about the opam-devel mailing list