From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rich@annexia.org>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 661C37EEEF
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 21:52:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  rich@annexia.org) identity=pra; client-ip=80.68.91.176;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rich@annexia.org";
  x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  rich@annexia.org designates 80.68.91.176 as permitted sender)
  identity=mailfrom; client-ip=80.68.91.176;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rich@annexia.org";
  x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible;
  x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org) identity=helo;
  client-ip=80.68.91.176;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rich@annexia.org";
  x-sender="postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ACJQC+uIlV/7BbRFBbgxAfNV+rMAoFAQEBAQEBBQFARJMMh0xMAQEBAQEBgQtBAQIChB17EyEFKIhnAQimbqZVhhw9h1yCOIMBgRQFkSSCWwGEV4Z4gTtCg06SayaBSQELNgIbgVM9MQEBgkYBAQE
X-IPAS-Result: A0ACJQC+uIlV/7BbRFBbgxAfNV+rMAoFAQEBAQEBBQFARJMMh0xMAQEBAQEBgQtBAQIChB17EyEFKIhnAQimbqZVhhw9h1yCOIMBgRQFkSSCWwGEV4Z4gTtCg06SayaBSQELNgIbgVM9MQEBgkYBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,667,1427752800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="137548754"
Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 23 Jun 2015 21:52:55 +0200
Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.84)
	(envelope-from <rich@annexia.org>)
	id 1Z7UFa-0008NV-Bq
	for caml-list@inria.fr; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 20:52:54 +0100
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 20:52:54 +0100
From: "Richard W.M. Jones" <rich@annexia.org>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Message-ID: <20150623195254.GA32190@annexia.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: [Caml-list] inconsistent assumptions over implementation Printf

This seems like a rather basic question, but here goes.

For a long time in Fedora we've used RPM dependencies to enforce that
the "inconsistent assumptions" error does not occur for end users.
This means encoding the OCaml version + MD5 hash of each interface.
For example:

  $ rpm -q --provides ocaml-runtime
  ...
  ocaml(Printf) = eb49a17645c5ea2dd298430a3c986186
  ...
  ocaml(runtime) = 4.02.2

With the move from 4.02.2+rc1 to 4.02.2 final, we've suddenly started
to see:

  Error: Files /usr/lib64/ocaml/gettext/gettextBase.cmxa
       and /usr/lib64/ocaml/stdlib.cmxa
       make inconsistent assumptions over implementation Printf

The ocaml(runtime) version string didn't change, so we're relying
solely on the ocaml(Printf) dependency to prevent this.  According to
my understanding the above error "cannot" happen, not least because
Printf didn't change its interface between -rc1 and final.

ocamlobjinfo from the relevant libraries:

  http://oirase.annexia.org/tmp/stdlib.cmxa.txt
  http://oirase.annexia.org/tmp/gettextBase.cmxa.txt

Can someone explain where my understanding is wrong?

Also - could we *please* make the error message more explanatory.
Printing out the mismatching MD5 hashes would be a good start.

Thanks,

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones
Red Hat