Re: On the coq ecosystem in Debian
Hi,
Le mardi 29 mars 2022 à 23:23 +0200, Ralf Treinen a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 09:52:16AM +0200,
> julien.puydt@gmail.com wrote:
> > Le lundi 28 mars 2022 à 08:14 +0200, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
>
> > > > Question: shouldn't I split the current libcoq-elpi in a
> > > > libcoq-
> > > > elpi
> > > > for the purely coq part and a libcoq-elpi-ocaml packages for
> > > > the
> > > > .cma/.cmxs pair?
> > >
> > > This is what I would have done in the initial packaging. I
> > > wouldn't
> > > do it now, but for bad reasons (delays in NEW processing).
> > >
> >
> > I will still do it: NEW processing is a one-time cost.
>
> You can use the experimental suite for that: just upload splitted
> packages to experimental and continue maintaining on the sid branch,
> and when the experimental packages have been accepted by ftpmaster
> you can carry the split over to sid. I think you have to be careful
> with version numbers, though.
In the meantime I pushed some things forward :
(1) libcoq-elpi cleared NEW pretty fast with the new binary split ;
(2) I uploaded src:aac-tactics which renames libaac-tactics-cqo to
libcoq-aac-tactics to NEW yesterday ;
(3) I think src:coq-float should be removed from Debian, as it seems
abandoned upstream and isn't even part of the Coq Platform.
I'm still digging into dh_ocaml and trying to understand how to adapt
it to coq. I'm clueless what corresponds to md5sums for coq packages ;
even computing deps doesn't look easy.
Should I post a RM: bug on coq-float?
J.Puydt
Reply to: