Another solution, if we want to stick with the possible collisions in
the names (which I personally very much dislike), would be to use a
small program (say "camlp4s-config" to stick with an old C tradition)
that would allow us to query for the naming informations. This would
be far from ideal but would at least allow for portable makefile.
Regards,
Till



On 7/10/07, skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 17:04 +0200, Daniel de Rauglaudre wrote:
>
> > For example:
> >      ./configure -name camlp5
> >
> > would name the commands, files and manual pages: camlp5, camlp5o, camlp5r,
> > camlp5r.cma, camlp5.1 and so on, and the library would be installed in
> > a subdirectory camlp5 of the ocaml library directory.
>
> Due respect and all but this is really no good because it
> makes things WORSE than they already are. How can someone
> write a build script using camlp5 when it is called camlp4
> on another system ..?
>
> I think you should just fix the name to camlp5 or camlp4s,
> since you have the power to do that, and can't change INRIA's
> decision to retain the name camlp4 for an incompatible version.
>
> At least make the default camlp5 or camlp4s to support future
> co-existence.
>
> --
> John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>


-- 
http://till-varoquaux.blogspot.com/