On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 20:26 -0400, Christopher A. Watford wrote: > On 8/31/05, skaller wrote: > > I have a small request for the Ocaml Windows installers: > > > > There are TWO Windows based Ocaml ports: MinGW and Win32 native > > plus the Cygwin port. > > > > Please could the builders of these packages > > distinguish them?? > I'll fix that. Great! Thanks. Only a small thing: not many people will have multiple Camel's installed, but some Felix developers will, at least whilst we're trying to get all the different build configurations to work ;( > > I have, and need, all three versions of Ocaml installed, > > and it is all very confusing, both MingW and native ports > > think they own the world and use the same OCAMLLIB variable, > > and also both expect themselves to be first in the PATH. > > Personally MingW should come second to MSVS. But I don't think your > 'first in PATH' to be correct. I'm not even sure why OCAMLLIB is set: the doco claims it isn't needed for XP. Probably you're right about the PATH thing, I'm not sure: how does bytecode find ocamlrun? > > I don't quite understand why CL.EXE is required, > > why isn't LINK.EXE good enough? Isn't everything > > done via assembler? > > CL is the primary on that 'toolchain'. I was unaware of being able to > go around it. Well, there is a linker, LINK.EXE .. and an assembler, ML.EXE, so why would you need a C/C++ compiler if ocamlopt generates assmebler only? Anyhow thanks: it's only a minor thing .. but it is very confusing, especially OCAMLLIB, since it even influences the Cygwin version of Ocaml (and then can't find Pervasives) -- John Skaller