From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org Sun Oct 18 19:59:58 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819C5439CE4 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CDrMf2v7Xz4rNR for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 61A69439CE3; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports-bugs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616AE43A414 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CDrMf21cSz4rXx for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28CDB17EDF for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 09IJxwIF070389 for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 09IJxwPR070388 for ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 218333] [exp-run] updating lang/ocaml 4.02 to 4.05.0 Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:56 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Ports Framework X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: hannes@mehnert.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: danfe@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: exp-run+ X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 19:59:58 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D218333 --- Comment #54 from hannes@mehnert.org --- Nice to hear from you. > I intend to review and possibly revive most (useful) of them in coming we= eks/months. Great! > It was because of the considerable techdebt we gained in between 4.02 and= 4.05. I hope the next hop won't be so costly (albeit my procrastination ma= y very well contribute to it). The "big jump" is to 4.06.0 and above, where the defaults of the "string" t= ype changed -- it is now immutable. This required some effort in the OCaml ecosystem, but there are lots of advantages (easier intuition of code, more compiler optimizations, ..). > > Would you be interested in a cleanup run of the FreeBSD ports that > > remove all the dangling libraries? > No, please. I looked into that again, and wondered about two things: - are there any visualization tools for dependencies between ports? - are there any statistics (maybe from pkg host) about popularity / installations of a certain port? > Language-specific package managers are cancer (NPM is particularly bad ex= ample of this) and do not align well with *nix distributions' own package m= anagers. It probably makes sense in Windows as it lacks any decent package= management, but not in FreeBSD. I agree with that statement, though looking from the real world I don't kno= w of any OCaml developer using their *nix package manager. Opam is rather friend= ly with other package managers - it only installs stuff into ~/.opam (not syst= em wide, ...). Given your above statement, I get that you'd appreciate the existing OCaml ports being retained and maintained (updated)? I'd still be more enthusiast= ic to find the OCaml ports that are actually useful and used, remove the other= s, and then move forward upgrading the lang/ocaml to a more recent version. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=