From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA15313; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 17:30:00 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA15421 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 17:29:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.44.193]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0GGTv503358; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 17:29:57 +0100 (MET) Received: (from luther@localhost) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA08268; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 17:29:54 +0100 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 17:29:54 +0100 From: Sven To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Pixel , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] -thread and ocamlc vs ocamlc.opt Message-ID: <20020116172954.A8211@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> References: <20020116170335.B13963@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20020116170335.B13963@pauillac.inria.fr>; from xavier.leroy@inria.fr on Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 05:03:35PM +0100 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 05:03:35PM +0100, Xavier Leroy wrote: > Frankly, I would rather remove the .opt compilers from the RPM, rather > than remove the non-.opt compilers. Mmm, ... Is there really much people using the .opt compilers ? Does it really make sense to have them packaged ? I myself was considering splitting them of into a separate debian package, since they are big, and most probably not used that much. I could also simply disable the building of them, but am afraid someone will need them in the future. Friendly, Sven LUther ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr