Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Review Request: jocaml - Join-calculus extension of Objective Caml|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Michel Alexandre Salim <michel>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>|
|Status:||CLOSED DEFERRED||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||fedora-package-review, notting, rjones|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2010-11-11 11:45:37 EST||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Michel Alexandre Salim 2009-02-23 20:38:02 EST
Spec URL: http://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/funpl/jocaml.spec SRPM URL: http://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/funpl/jocaml-3.11.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: JoCaml is a extension of Objective Caml for concurrent and distributed programming, based upon the join-calculus.
Comment 1 Michel Alexandre Salim 2009-02-23 20:43:53 EST
Packager notes: - see http://yquem.inria.fr/pipermail/jocaml-list/2009-February/000105.html for packaging discussions with upstream - using standard find-provides/find-requires rather than Ocaml's, because the latter outputs internal modules that mostly duplicate Ocaml's, which could potentially mean that installing an Ocaml library would pull in Jocaml instead of Ocaml. - This JoCaml is configured with a companion Ocaml, meaning it fallbacks to using the Ocaml-provided library if a particular JoCaml library is not present. Thus most of the standard library have been stripped out (again, to avoid dependency confusion). Because JoCaml skips from 3.10.0 to 3.11.0, that means this package has to be tested using Rawhide's Ocaml. - This is tested with the JoCaml ray tracer: http://jocaml.inria.fr/pub/joex/JoCamlsRUs.tar.gz Upstream promises to provide a test suite that can be used to verify that our stripped JoCaml is still functional; will test against it when it arrives.
Comment 2 Richard W.M. Jones 2009-02-24 05:11:19 EST
Copy of an email I sent on this subject to Michel ----------------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 08:50:05AM -0500, Michel Salim wrote: > Almost ready with the review request, but there are some things I need > to resolve regarding OCaml find-provides and find-requires first: > > http://yquem.inria.fr/pipermail/jocaml-list/2009-February/000107.html > > - JoCaml provides an almost-identical set of base libraries to OCaml, > and so if I use ocaml-find-provides.sh and ocaml-find-requires.sh, it > might erroneously cause JoCaml to be pulled in when a user installs an > add-on OCaml library on a system without an installed ocaml. The situation sounds similar to the OCaml cross-compiler that we ship here: http://homes.merjis.com/~rich/mingw/fedora-rawhide/x86_64/RPMS/ http://hg.et.redhat.com/cgi-bin/hg-misc.cgi/fedora-mingw--devel/file/tip/ocaml In that case the solution is to (a) have a separate library directory and (b) have a modified ocaml-find-provides/ocaml-find-requires which uses the alternate library directory and makes "ocaml(jocaml,Module) = HASH" dependencies. Step (b) is not actually implemented right now. In the case of the cross-compiler, we choose between them using findlib and an environment variable: http://firstname.lastname@example.org/msg20208.html > - When asking upstream about the modules that have different hashes, > it was revealed that some of the dependencies discovered by > ocaml-find-provides.sh might be internal modules, rather than exported > libraries. I'm attaching the diff between the sorted lists provided by > ocaml and jocaml: Yes, the scripts are a bit hit-and-miss, because the program we use (ocamlobjinfo) doesn't quite have the necessary output to do dependency analysis properly. To get around this we hard-code a few modules to ignore, and generally it works well, but possibly there are still a few bugs in this area.
Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2009-08-03 21:34:18 EDT
So what's the status here? The last comment makes it seem as if there are problems with this package, but I don't know enough about ocaml to know for sure. Is there something that needs to be fixed before this package can be reviewed?
Comment 4 Richard W.M. Jones 2009-08-05 03:34:27 EDT
I don't have much time to look at these packages (and bug 460894) but I'm more than happy to leave them open. If I catch Michel on IRC I'll remind him.
Comment 5 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-02 17:28:44 EDT
After being marked "not ready" for well over a year now, can we just close this out?
Comment 6 Richard W.M. Jones 2010-11-02 17:35:08 EDT
I guess so, Michel?
Comment 7 Michel Alexandre Salim 2010-11-11 11:45:37 EST
Busy with some other packages; I'll create a new request when I have time to fix the packaging.