X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-50.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Subject: Re: ocaml: patches needed From: "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" To: cygwin In-Reply-To: <3F718711-595B-44C5-B2A8-61CF29BA00A4@inria.fr> References: <1439640916 DOT 139526 DOT 1286812910597 DOT JavaMail DOT root AT zmbs1 DOT inria DOT fr> <3F718711-595B-44C5-B2A8-61CF29BA00A4 AT inria DOT fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 10:14:51 -0500 Message-ID: <1286982891.2656.2.camel@YAAKOV04> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 15:47 +0200, Damien Doligez wrote: > I think it's a bad idea to have something named "ocaml" that doesn't > implement the full upstream package. What I will do instead is: > > ocaml-base for the system except camlp4 > ocaml-camlp4 for camlp4 > ocaml an empty helper package that depends on ocaml-base and ocaml-camlp4 > > I'm not sure what to name the base package: it could be ocaml-base or > ocaml-core. Is there a generally-accepted naming convention for such > cases? No, but Debian uses ocaml-base, so I'd suggest that. Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple