Re: [Caml-list] Anybody interested in creating binary RPMs for each official release of the compiler?

["Richard W.M. Jones" <rich@annexia.org>]

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 08:36:09PM +0200, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 03/24/2014 01:02 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 06:15:50PM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote:
> >> On 03/24/2014 05:33 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:41:20AM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote:
> >>>> I'm always annoyed when I have to wait ~20mn to install OCaml on a machine.
> >>>>
> >>>> Nowadays, thanks to OPAM, I think only a compiler is needed to
> >>>> bootstrap quickly an OCaml environment for developers.
> >>>
> >>> Binary RPMs for which distro?
> >>
> >> I am personally interested into:
> >>
> >> CentOS release 6.4 (Final)
> >> CentOS release 6.5 (Final)
> >>
> >> But ideally, any rpm-based distro should have access
> >> to the recent OCaml compilers, I fell (or I am just dreaming).
> > 
> > We have to stick with the original OCaml compiler on RHEL releases
> > because of binary compatibility.  Also EPEL policy doesn't allow us to
> > ship an upgrading OCaml compiler in EPEL, since we can't replace
> > packages from the original RHEL.
> 
> What if you use a different package name?
> Apparently there are some RPMs for CentOS6 called ocaml4-*:
> http://pkgs.org/search/?query=ocaml4&type=smart

Those are packages outside EPEL, which means that a CentOS user would
have to add another repo, or deal with dependencies themselves (yuck).

But yes, you can create a repo which contains whatever packages you
want, if you can persuade people to add your repo.  All it needs is a
webserver, or you can use COPR to host it (like PPAs for EPEL).

The actual policy is here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Policy_for_Conflicting_Packages

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones
Red Hat