Nuke some Ocaml ports

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Nuke some Ocaml ports

Kenneth Westerback
Following up some private discussions about ports vs opam I did
some grep'ing, google'ing, github'ing, and opam'ing and came up
with the list below.

I think this are prime candidates for being removed from the ports
tree. 14 out of the 56 ocaml related ports I could find.

ALL but ocaml-curses and ocmal-calendar are behind the upstream to
one extent or the other.  The migration to github seems to be in
flood and at least two current upstreams appear to have been recently
obsoleted.

All are available at their current level from opam 1.2 and thus the
upcoming opam 2.0. None seem to be used by other ports and so seem
to be there to support actual ocaml programming efforts rather than
being end-user ports written in ocaml for people to use as-is.

My impression of the Ocaml space is that 'real programmers' get
their libraries from opam these days. (>1500 opam packages and
counting!) I am but a ocaml dilettante but that's certainly what I
do. I have strong suspicions that Anil would prefer the ones he is
currently down as maintainer for to disappear into the Borg.

My main motivation is to ease the burden off keeping ocaml current
during my episodic spasms of enthusiasm for it. :-) We are soon to
be two releases behind! I think the chances of keeping current are
shrinking as it is after their move to an aggressive six month
release cycle. Where did they get that idea from?

Anyway, I'm happy to do the dirty work of nuking any or all of these
ports and then continuing the process of weeding out ports that
might be more useful to get people sourcing from opam.

And thus hopefully making it simpler to keep us on the ocaml bleeding
edge.

Thoughts?

.... Ken

The numbers <our version>/<latest upstream version>/<Opam version>

Anil:
./databases/ocaml-postgresql 3.2.1/4.0.1/4.0.1 (master & homepage dead?)
./databases/ocaml-sqlite3 2.0.9/4.1.2/4.1.2 (master & homepage dead?)
./devel/ocaml-calendar 2.03.2/2.0.4/2.03.2
./graphics/ocaml-camlimages 4.2.1/4.2.1/4.2.3
./security/ocaml-cryptokit 1.10/1.11/1.11
./textproc/ocaml-rss 2.0/2.2.1/2.2.2
./textproc/ocaml-xml-light 2.2/2.4/2.4
./textproc/ocaml-xmlm 1.2.0/1.2.0/1.2.0

Chrisz
./devel/ocaml-batteries 2.5.0/2.5.3/2.5.3
./devel/ocaml-net 4.0.2/4.1.2/4.1.2

Edd:
./devel/ocaml-mlgmp 0.13/20120224/20120224

None:
./devel/ocaml-bitstring 2.0.4/2.0.4/2.1.0 (google code!?)
./devel/ocaml-curses 1.0.3/1.0.3/1.0.3
./textproc/ocaml-csv 1.4.1/1.6/1.6

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Edd Barrett-3
Hi Ken,

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:57:10AM -0500, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> Edd:
> ./devel/ocaml-mlgmp 0.13/20120224/20120224

I think I was experimenting with this during my PhD. I certainly don't
use it now. Nothing depends on it. It can probably go.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Christopher Zimmermann-2
In reply to this post by Kenneth Westerback
On 2017-02-27 Kenneth R Westerback <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Anyway, I'm happy to do the dirty work of nuking any or all of these
> ports and then continuing the process of weeding out ports that
> might be more useful to get people sourcing from opam.
>
> And thus hopefully making it simpler to keep us on the ocaml bleeding
> edge.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> .... Ken
>
> The numbers <our version>/<latest upstream version>/<Opam version>
>
> Anil:
> ./databases/ocaml-postgresql 3.2.1/4.0.1/4.0.1 (master & homepage dead?)
> ./databases/ocaml-sqlite3 2.0.9/4.1.2/4.1.2 (master & homepage dead?)
> ./devel/ocaml-calendar 2.03.2/2.0.4/2.03.2
> ./graphics/ocaml-camlimages 4.2.1/4.2.1/4.2.3
> ./security/ocaml-cryptokit 1.10/1.11/1.11
> ./textproc/ocaml-rss 2.0/2.2.1/2.2.2
> ./textproc/ocaml-xml-light 2.2/2.4/2.4
> ./textproc/ocaml-xmlm 1.2.0/1.2.0/1.2.0
>
> Chrisz
> ./devel/ocaml-batteries 2.5.0/2.5.3/2.5.3
> ./devel/ocaml-net 4.0.2/4.1.2/4.1.2
OK chrisz@

> Edd:
> ./devel/ocaml-mlgmp 0.13/20120224/20120224
>
> None:
> ./devel/ocaml-bitstring 2.0.4/2.0.4/2.1.0 (google code!?)
> ./devel/ocaml-curses 1.0.3/1.0.3/1.0.3
> ./textproc/ocaml-csv 1.4.1/1.6/1.6

OK chrisz@


I would like to add more to this list:

devel/utop
devel/ocaml-lambda-term
devel/ocaml-zed
devel/ocaml-lwt
devel/ocaml-menhir
devel/ocaml-ppx-tools
devel/ocaml-react
devel/ocaml-uutf
devel/omake
security/ocaml-ssl
textproc/ocaml-csv
textproc/ocaml-text


anyone using lang/obc ??


I'd try an opam install before removing the port, just to be sure you
don't throw patches out we might want to keep.


Christopher


--
http://gmerlin.de
OpenPGP: http://gmerlin.de/christopher.pub
2779 7F73 44FD 0736 B67A  C410 69EC 7922 34B4 2566

attachment0 (817 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Daniel Dickman
In reply to this post by Kenneth Westerback


> On Feb 27, 2017, at 11:57 AM, Kenneth R Westerback <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> None:
> ./devel/ocaml-bitstring 2.0.4/2.0.4/2.1.0 (google code!?)
>

originally was needed for lang/compcert on powerpc, but believe newer versions of compcert no longer require it. so ok with me on this one.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Daniel Dickman
In reply to this post by Christopher Zimmermann-2


> On Feb 27, 2017, at 3:23 PM, Christopher Zimmermann <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-02-27 Kenneth R Westerback <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, I'm happy to do the dirty work of nuking any or all of these
>> ports and then continuing the process of weeding out ports that
>> might be more useful to get people sourcing from opam.
>>
>> And thus hopefully making it simpler to keep us on the ocaml bleeding
>> edge.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> .... Ken
>>
>> The numbers <our version>/<latest upstream version>/<Opam version>
>>
>> Anil:
>> ./databases/ocaml-postgresql 3.2.1/4.0.1/4.0.1 (master & homepage dead?)
>> ./databases/ocaml-sqlite3 2.0.9/4.1.2/4.1.2 (master & homepage dead?)
>> ./devel/ocaml-calendar 2.03.2/2.0.4/2.03.2
>> ./graphics/ocaml-camlimages 4.2.1/4.2.1/4.2.3
>> ./security/ocaml-cryptokit 1.10/1.11/1.11
>> ./textproc/ocaml-rss 2.0/2.2.1/2.2.2
>> ./textproc/ocaml-xml-light 2.2/2.4/2.4
>> ./textproc/ocaml-xmlm 1.2.0/1.2.0/1.2.0
>>
>> Chrisz
>> ./devel/ocaml-batteries 2.5.0/2.5.3/2.5.3
>> ./devel/ocaml-net 4.0.2/4.1.2/4.1.2
>
> OK chrisz@
>
>> Edd:
>> ./devel/ocaml-mlgmp 0.13/20120224/20120224
>>
>> None:
>> ./devel/ocaml-bitstring 2.0.4/2.0.4/2.1.0 (google code!?)
>> ./devel/ocaml-curses 1.0.3/1.0.3/1.0.3
>> ./textproc/ocaml-csv 1.4.1/1.6/1.6
>
> OK chrisz@
>
>
> I would like to add more to this list:
>
> devel/utop

please no.

> devel/ocaml-lambda-term
> devel/ocaml-zed
> devel/ocaml-lwt
> devel/ocaml-menhir

please no. it's required for compcert.

> devel/ocaml-ppx-tools
> devel/ocaml-react
> devel/ocaml-uutf
> devel/omake
> security/ocaml-ssl
> textproc/ocaml-csv
> textproc/ocaml-text
>
>
> anyone using lang/obc ??
>
>
> I'd try an opam install before removing the port, just to be sure you
> don't throw patches out we might want to keep.
>
>
> Christopher
>
>
> --
> http://gmerlin.de
> OpenPGP: http://gmerlin.de/christopher.pub
> 2779 7F73 44FD 0736 B67A  C410 69EC 7922 34B4 2566

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Christopher Zimmermann-2
On 2017-02-27 Daniel Dickman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Feb 27, 2017, at 3:23 PM, Christopher Zimmermann <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I would like to add more to this list:
> >
> > devel/utop  
>
> please no.

I acknowlegde this is a very useful tool for the OCaml developer, but
it also has heavy dependencies.
Since most OCaml users on OpenBSD use opam, maintaining this stuff is a
burden.
Is using opam no option for you?
As an alternative, when utop is unavailable, I use `rlwrap ocaml` to get
nice command line editing.

> > devel/ocaml-lambda-term
> > devel/ocaml-zed
> > devel/ocaml-lwt
> > devel/ocaml-menhir  
>
> please no. it's required for compcert.

You talk about menhir only here? That's no problem. It has no
dependencies.

But still is opam no option for you? If not, why?


Christopher

--
http://gmerlin.de
OpenPGP: http://gmerlin.de/christopher.pub
2779 7F73 44FD 0736 B67A  C410 69EC 7922 34B4 2566

attachment0 (817 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Edd Barrett-3
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:31:21PM +0100, Christopher Zimmermann wrote:

> On 2017-02-27 Daniel Dickman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > devel/utop  
> >
> > please no.
>
> I acknowlegde this is a very useful tool for the OCaml developer, but
> it also has heavy dependencies.
> Since most OCaml users on OpenBSD use opam, maintaining this stuff is a
> burden.

I also would like to keep utop if possible. Can you install utop from
opam? If so you can probably nuke the port. FWIW, I have never used
opam, but then, I only dabbled in OCaml.

> As an alternative, when utop is unavailable, I use `rlwrap ocaml` to get
> nice command line editing.

I recall that I didn't get on with this solution for some reason.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Anil Madhavapeddy-2
In reply to this post by Daniel Dickman
On 27 Feb 2017, at 20:58, Daniel Dickman <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 3:23 PM, Christopher Zimmermann <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-02-27 Kenneth R Westerback <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyway, I'm happy to do the dirty work of nuking any or all of these
>>> ports and then continuing the process of weeding out ports that
>>> might be more useful to get people sourcing from opam.
>>>
>>> And thus hopefully making it simpler to keep us on the ocaml bleeding
>>> edge.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> .... Ken
>>>
>>> The numbers <our version>/<latest upstream version>/<Opam version>
>>>
>>> Anil:
>>> ./databases/ocaml-postgresql 3.2.1/4.0.1/4.0.1 (master & homepage dead?)
>>> ./databases/ocaml-sqlite3 2.0.9/4.1.2/4.1.2 (master & homepage dead?)
>>> ./devel/ocaml-calendar 2.03.2/2.0.4/2.03.2
>>> ./graphics/ocaml-camlimages 4.2.1/4.2.1/4.2.3
>>> ./security/ocaml-cryptokit 1.10/1.11/1.11
>>> ./textproc/ocaml-rss 2.0/2.2.1/2.2.2
>>> ./textproc/ocaml-xml-light 2.2/2.4/2.4
>>> ./textproc/ocaml-xmlm 1.2.0/1.2.0/1.2.0
>>>
>>> Chrisz
>>> ./devel/ocaml-batteries 2.5.0/2.5.3/2.5.3
>>> ./devel/ocaml-net 4.0.2/4.1.2/4.1.2
>>
>> OK chrisz@
>>
>>> Edd:
>>> ./devel/ocaml-mlgmp 0.13/20120224/20120224
>>>
>>> None:
>>> ./devel/ocaml-bitstring 2.0.4/2.0.4/2.1.0 (google code!?)
>>> ./devel/ocaml-curses 1.0.3/1.0.3/1.0.3
>>> ./textproc/ocaml-csv 1.4.1/1.6/1.6
>>
>> OK chrisz@
>>
>>
>> I would like to add more to this list:
>>
>> devel/utop
>
> please no.
>
>> devel/ocaml-lambda-term
>> devel/ocaml-zed
>> devel/ocaml-lwt
>> devel/ocaml-menhir
>
> please no. it's required for compcert.

I'm ok with deleting the intermediate ports, but we should indeed keep anything that is required for Compcert in the ports tree.  It's very useful to have a binary package of it.

As for utop, I'd be happy just installing that through OPAM.  You typically also need to install libraries with utop to make it useful, and that's difficult to do with a system OCaml and a port-installed OPAM (it can use the system compiler fine, but libraries must be managed all through opam or not at all).

Anil
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nuke some Ocaml ports

Kenneth Westerback
In reply to this post by Edd Barrett-3
On 02/28, Edd Barrett wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:31:21PM +0100, Christopher Zimmermann wrote:
> > On 2017-02-27 Daniel Dickman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > devel/utop  
> > >
> > > please no.
> >
> > I acknowlegde this is a very useful tool for the OCaml developer, but
> > it also has heavy dependencies.
> > Since most OCaml users on OpenBSD use opam, maintaining this stuff is a
> > burden.
>
> I also would like to keep utop if possible. Can you install utop from
> opam? If so you can probably nuke the port. FWIW, I have never used
> opam, but then, I only dabbled in OCaml.

utop is indeed installable from opam. I always use it thusly.

I classify it as a programmer's tool, not an end-usr tool and thus I
would indeed like to remove the port (and the resulting dangling
dependencies as pointed out by Chris).

.... Ken

>
> > As an alternative, when utop is unavailable, I use `rlwrap ocaml` to get
> > nice command line editing.
>
> I recall that I didn't get on with this solution for some reason.
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Edd Barrett
>
> http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk
>