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 MAA12698; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 12:53:30 +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 MAA12663 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 12:53:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rto2.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-2.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.254]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g8OArS512008; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 12:53:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.79) by mel-rto2.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D89D99900297147; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 12:53:28 +0200 Received: from iliana (193.250.202.126) by mel-rta8.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D8011E3006AD9AB; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 12:53:28 +0200 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17tjDV-0000NJ-00; Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:30:41 +0200 Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:30:41 +0200 To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Sven LUTHER , Gerd Stolpmann , Alessandro Baretta , Ocaml Subject: Re: We should start using -pack by default when building libraries, (was : Re: [Caml-list] Meta module in findlib and the need for namespaces) Message-ID: <20020924063041.GA1436@iliana> References: <3D87406D.9010406@baretta.com> <20020922212920.GG914@ice.gerd-stolpmann.de> <20020923084301.GA1272@iliana> <20020923163619.A16997@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020923163619.A16997@pauillac.inria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 04:36:19PM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > > Note that dynlink.cma not only contains Meta, but also other modules > > > with plain names: Misc, Config, Ident, Path, Types, i.e. names for > > > which name clashes are much more likely than for cryptic names. > > > > Well, is it not for exactly this kind of problems that the -pack option > > was implemented ? > > Yes, exactly. :))) > For other existing libraries, backward compatibility can deter using > -pack, but I'd encourage authors of new libraries to use it in order > to export only one compilation unit. Could we consider making using -pack the standard for a future version of ocaml (3.07) and add a -nopack version for those that don't want to use it, especially when building .cmas ? This would need a bit of discussion first, but mostly, i don't think anyone would object to this, at least not very strongly. That said ... John Carr Wrote : | OCaml 3.06 does not support -pack when using native code on a system | without the GNU linker. If you release software that depends on -pack, | I will not be able to use it. Well, this would cause a problem, which need to be solved before -pack is supported as standard. What are exactly the cases were it causes problem, (AIX when not using the GNU linker, i guess, but also maybe windows ?) and is there any chance this can be solved soonly ? Alternatively, this could be a feature that could be enabled/disabled at build time ? 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