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 MAA23260; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:45:57 +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 MAA18803 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:45:56 +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 g0VBjtD01992 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:45:55 +0100 (MET) Received: (from luther@localhost) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA26561; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:45:23 +0100 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:45:23 +0100 From: Sven To: Jacques Garrigue Cc: itz@speakeasy.org, caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Compiler ActiveDVI (CVS) Message-ID: <20020131124523.B26246@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> References: <20020125151002.B16553@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> <20020126075921Y.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <86pu3ylywc.fsf@speakeasy.org> <20020126104546G.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20020126104546G.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp>; from garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp on Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 10:45:46AM +0900 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 10:45:46AM +0900, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > Hello Ian, > > > Jacques> If you start to mess around with the directories, this is not > > Jacques> very helpful for anybody. > > > > Yes, it is: to people with experience on Debian, but none on Ocaml. > > Which is exactly the sort of people that would install a binary > > package, I think. > > The point is that the "right" way to compile an extension to ocaml is > to use ocamlc, which will automatically add /usr/lib/ocaml to the > include path. If the caml subdirectory is not there, this will not be > very useful. Using ocamlc will also set properly some compilation > flags for thread compliance, and make sure you can build a dll. I can add a symlink then, if it is agreable. > Since these headers will preferably _not_ be used by gcc directly, > they don't need to be in the standard hierarchy. Well, but people will look there. > Another problem is that both ocaml's (unfortunately limited) > documentation, and ocaml developpers base themselves on a standard > installation. If you start messing around, you end-up with the kind of > quiproquo we are seeing here. I will have to patch the documentation then, or better yet add a note about them. > > The way I did it when I built Ocaml from sources was with a symlink, > > so that it existed in both places. > > A symlink avoids all these problems. And if you do it yourself, you > know that you're doing something nonstandard, and will no bother the > developpers with this. I will add a symlink in the next version of the package. > > BTW, /usr/include/ocaml (to match the package name) would be a better > > name. > > That seems a good idea too. but will break all those #include :))) 5BTW, i agree, there are lot of caml left around in the ocaml distribution and friends which could be changed to ocaml. > By the way, all my comments do not intend to criticize the work of > packagers. I know this is a hard task. I just hope we could end up > with a better way to combine efforts. Okay, i appreciate, i maybe don't all the time see things as fully as i should, and may ignore problems that you or others may encounter. I will add a symlink though, and everybody will be happy. 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