From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C43BC8C for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:25:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0I8POWv025697 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:25:24 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA25978 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:25:24 +0100 (MET) Received: from cachan-2-82-67-232-89.fbx.proxad.net (cachan-2-82-67-232-89.fbx.proxad.net [82.67.232.89]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j0I8PNL5025694 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:25:23 +0100 Received: by cachan-2-82-67-232-89.fbx.proxad.net (Postfix, from userid 500) id 039712850; Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:25:22 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:25:22 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= Payrard To: Ocaml Cc: pixel@mandrakesoft.com Subject: dependancy problems? Message-ID: <20050118082522.GB8298@cachan-2-82-67-232-89.fbx.proxad.net> Reply-To: stef@payrard.net Mail-Followup-To: stef@payrard.net, Ocaml , pixel@mandrakesoft.com References: <20050118073327.GA8298@cachan-2-82-67-232-89.fbx.proxad.net> <200501180809.15056.jon@jdh30.plus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200501180809.15056.jon@jdh30.plus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41ECC7F4.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41ECC7F3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; dependancy:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 ocaml:01 cameleon:01 rpms:01 usr:01 lib:01 ocaml:01 lablgtk:01 gtkthread:01 cmx:01 usr:01 lib:01 threads:01 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: Hi, note to pixel: you are in copy because you may be interested. On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 08:09:14AM +0000, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Tuesday 18 January 2005 07:33, Stéphane Payrard wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am an ocaml beginner and I try to compile the last snapshot of > > cameleon. I am using mandrake with the following rpms: > > ocaml-lablgtk-1.2.7-1mdk > > ocaml-3.08.2-1mdk > > > > I get the following message when trying to compile: > > > > Files /usr/lib/ocaml/lablgtk/gtkThread.cmx > > and /usr/lib/ocaml/threads/threads.cmxa > > make inconsistent assumptions over implementation Thread > > > > Should I use different versiosn of either lablgtk or ocaml? > > The INSTALL file suggest OCaml 3.07 and LablGtk 1.2.6 . > > Or is there an easy way to tweak cameleon to get it to compile > > with the ocaml and lablgtk versions I have. > > I think this problem is due to different ocaml versions being used to generate > lablgtk and threads. Does this mean that the mandrake people have not done a proper job about dependancies? I have installed unison that also uses lablgtk. There is no problem there. So I am puzzled. > > Interfaces between OCaml compilation units are *very* brittle. This is being > discussed on the list at the moment, as even a minor version change of the > compiler (e.g. 3.08.2 -> 3.08.3) breaks compatibility. Naive question: is this due to some internal layout of compiled structures like classe vtables in C++? Or is this just because modules are updated and their signature change? > > The good news is that this binary incompatibility is because the compiler is > very pedantic about interfaces and guarantees that everything will work. > > Your best bet is either to compile all of the packages yourself or to use > someone else's packages. I find Debian to be excellent in this > respect. > > Cheers, > Jon. > > PS: 3.08 has some useful additions which you may well find that people use in > their code now (e.g. immediate objects). > Thx for you help. -- stef