From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 195BEBBAF for ; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 01:17:04 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al4AAEveJknUnw6TlGdsb2JhbACCPJEfAQEBAQkLCAkRBL8pgnw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,647,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="20243879" Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net ([212.159.14.147]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 22 Nov 2008 01:17:03 +0100 Received: from [87.115.13.228] (helo=leper.local) by ptb-relay03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1L3gBK-0004si-V4 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:17:03 +0000 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Native dynlink on 3.11: a request for packagers Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 01:19:38 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <755814.6350.qm@web111514.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <755814.6350.qm@web111514.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200811220119.38157.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Plusnet-Relay: ecd7443bfa694f0b9eb78eadd307283e X-Spam: no; 0.00; dynlink:01 packagers:01 ocamlfind:01 ocaml:01 findlib:01 ocamlnet:01 pxp:01 cmxa:01 frog:98 wrote:01 dynamically:01 caml-list:01 precisely:01 linking:02 native:03 On Friday 21 November 2008 23:45:34 Dario Teixeira wrote: > Hi, > > > Does ocamlfind support any of this? Since I'm now also > > cross-compiling OCaml, I've certainly come to appreciate > > findlib more than ever. > > Indeed it does. The current version of Ocsigen already > makes use of this feature. However, because very few > (none, actually, other than Ocsigen's) packages currently > ship with cmxs files, an Ocsigen user who wants to play > with native code is forced to manually generate them. > (What impelled me to write the request was precisely > having just gone through the process of producing the > cmxs for a bunch of Ocamlnet and PXP libraries...) This begs the question: what is the advantage of a .cmxa over a .cmxs, and what are the downsides of linking everything dynamically? -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e