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 IAA08062; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 08:53:26 +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 IAA08721 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 08:53:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.1]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3E6rMYM003288 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 08:53:23 +0200 Received: from localhost (suiren.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.25]) by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (8.9.3p2-20030924/3.7W) with ESMTP id PAA14081; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:53:15 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:53:15 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20040414.155315.82047030.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> To: vanevery@indiegamedesign.com Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: GODI vs. Ocamake From: Jacques GARRIGUE In-Reply-To: References: <20040414.115245.31191001.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.0.64 on Emacs 21.2 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocamake:01 jacques:01 brandon:99 jacques:01 roof:99 stub:01 dependencies:01 invalidated:01 ocamake:01 orthogonal:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 garrigue:01 garrigue:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 308 From: "Brandon J. Van Every" > Jacques GARRIGUE wrote: > > > > I think that it would be much more reasonable to have a packaging > > system controlling all of ocaml, but only ocaml. > > Reasonable, but foreign libraries aren't going away. Not until OCaml > has everything under its own roof, and that will be quite some time. A > proper OCaml package system will have deal with foreign libraries > somehow, even if the support is half-assed. What I meant was just that the packaging system should not try to replace the native package system of the platform for non-ocaml stuff. But it must of course handle stub libraries, and even dependencies on external libraries. GODI makes some nice attempt at that, through configuration pseudo-packages, that let it know how some external libraries should be used. > > Last, we need support for windows, and for binary packages. > > I hope you only mean "last" as a way of listing things needed, i.e. This just happened to be the end of my mail, when I was writing it, but then I added more stuff, and last was invalidated. By the way, the full paragraph was clear enough: Last, we need support for windows, and for binary packages. I don't know who is going to do it, but these are requirements to make godi the standard. > So how is OCamake? Is it not the obvious place to begin? OCamake is a useful tool, but its goal is simplifying the building of individual programs or libraries. It has no support for packaging or recompilation that I know of. I believe the two problems are orthogonal. Jacques Garrigue ------------------- 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