Re: [Caml-list] Build-/Installation-Tools - not enogh of them?

[Simon Cruanes <simon.cruanes.2007@m4x.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1233 bytes --]

Le Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Jaap Boender wrote:
> Bootstrapping is also a problem: I don't know if the problem has been solved
> in the meantime, but not too long ago it was impossible to package opam,
> because some of the libraries needed to build opam actually used the opam
> installer themselves. I had to write my own version of the opam installer to
> get around that particular problem.

That's a bit strange, I recall that opam's source archive contains
opam's dependencies and allows to build them using `make lib-ext` or
something like that. I don't recall having problems installing opam2 from
source.

> It's all well and good to say that 'using opam is the default', but can we
> please spare a thought for distribution editors as well? Using ocaml and
> friends with the package manager that comes with your distribution is a
> reasonable use case, I'd think.

The ecosystem has indeed been changing rapidly this year, but in a good
way, imho: a lot of people and projects have converged to using `dune`
as the build system, and opam2 as the package manager (and project
description). Once dune is packaged for a distribution, a lot of OCaml
projects should be buildable, I think.

-- 
Simon Cruanes

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]