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 IAA16332; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:25:51 +0200 (MET DST) 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 IAA16390 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:25:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-4.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.23]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g7R6Pmf18730; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:25:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.79) by mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D64406F001FF279; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:25:48 +0200 Received: from iliana (193.250.202.4) by mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D49FF79008AB0A4; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 08:25:48 +0200 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17jJMl-00019T-00; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 14:53:11 +0200 Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 14:53:01 +0200 To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Sven LUTHER , malc , Oliver Bandel , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] "No bytecode specified" Message-ID: <20020826125301.GB4254@iliana> References: <20020826083804.GA1103@iliana> <20020826120031.A28824@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020826120031.A28824@pauillac.inria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 12:00:31PM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > Alternatively, strip can be fixed to know about ocaml bytecode. > > I wouldn't recommend that -- if I were the maintainer of "strip", I'd > scream at such a kludge :-) :))) That said, maybe strip has a list of things not to strip or something such ? > > I was also told that if the ocaml team would have used another > > label/tag/whatever it is called in the binary code than the one it is > > using, then strip would know about it. > > Yes, a cleaner solution would be to embed the OCaml bytecode in a > special ELF section. But there are two problems with this: 1- the ELF > file format is quite complex, and 2- this solution would break utterly > on non-ELF systems, e.g. Windows. Ok, you know a lot more than me about this, but couldn't it not be possible to implement this only on ELF systems ? Anyway, the resulting code is arch/system dependant, since you embed it with ocamlrun anyway, is it not ? > The current solution (just stick the bytecode at the end of the native > executable) is a hack, but it's a hack that works on *every single > platform* I've tested in the last 12 years... Sure, a good reason for it i guess, but the result is that strip breaks ocaml bytecode executables. Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners