Conversation
Alizter
force-pushed
the
push-nqsuumtwqqly
branch
from
September 10, 2026 11:09
5313655 to
128b7f1
Compare
rgrinberg
reviewed
Sep 10, 2026
rgrinberg
reviewed
Sep 10, 2026
Alizter
force-pushed
the
push-nqsuumtwqqly
branch
12 times, most recently
from
September 15, 2026 12:07
5480ec2 to
ec579f2
Compare
Include whole packages reached through library dependencies and track installed file changes. Fixes ocaml#15511 The melange closure is not traversed. Signed-off-by: Ali Caglayan <alizter@gmail.com>
Alizter
force-pushed
the
push-nqsuumtwqqly
branch
from
September 15, 2026 15:45
ec579f2 to
a64c9fc
Compare
Alizter
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 16, 2026 11:22
Collaborator
Author
|
This currently breaks CI because nix is compressing man pages and making the
1 seems the best as a temporary solution. I don't know if there is anything else we can do here. |
Library-induced package dependencies make (package utop) also track lambda-term. Nix compression leaves its dune-package manifest pointing to missing uncompressed manpages. Extend the existing utop workaround to lambda-term so the CI shell keeps the installed files consistent with the manifest. Signed-off-by: Ali Caglayan <alizter@gmail.com>
rgrinberg
reviewed
Sep 17, 2026
| | Found of Lib_info.external_ | ||
| | Hidden of Lib_info.external_ Hidden.t | ||
| | Found of Lib_info.external_ * Package.Name.t option | ||
| | Hidden of Lib_info.external_ Hidden.t * Package.Name.t option |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it become easier if you just put the data in the Lib_info.t? In fact, can't we use the package info that's already there. It might need augmenting for external libraries like you did here, but it's consistent with the rest of the code.
rgrinberg
reviewed
Sep 17, 2026
| let+ package = | ||
| let* lock_dir_active = Pkg_rules.lock_dir_active context_name in | ||
| if lock_dir_active | ||
| then Pkg_rules.find_package_by_installed_path context_name dir |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand why we need to do this. Why not return package_name always?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Include whole packages reached through library dependencies and track installed file changes. For packages in the lock directory, we have no easy way of getting the libraries directly, so instead we use the direct package closure which is already computed.
When we start loading sources directly, this distinction with the old "package universe" will no longer exist, so I think its fine for it to work like this for now.