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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23805BB84 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:15:31 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtECADAYCUnAXQIngWdsb2JhbACUCQEBFiK4L4NR X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,513,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="30915579" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 30 Oct 2008 10:15:31 +0100 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9U9FUwD025997 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:15:30 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah8CALgXCUnB/BYdgmdsb2JhbACUCQEBCwsIBxMDuCaDUQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,513,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="16655055" Received: from smtp20.orange.fr ([193.252.22.29]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 30 Oct 2008 10:15:29 +0100 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf2013.orange.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id C1ADD1C000BD; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:15:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (APuteaux-154-1-51-239.w81-249.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.249.2.239]) by mwinf2013.orange.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 71B881C000AA; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:15:29 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20081030091529465.71B881C000AA@mwinf2013.orange.fr Message-ID: <49097B2F.4090801@frisch.fr> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:15:27 +0100 From: Alain Frisch User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?U3TDqXBoYW5lIEdsb25kdQ==?= Cc: caml-list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Relevance of explicit -linkall with ocamlopt -shared References: <490974E5.4080002@glondu.net> In-Reply-To: <490974E5.4080002@glondu.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 081029-0, 29/10/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 49097B32.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; frisch:01 frisch:01 -linkall:01 ocamlopt:01 -shared:01 ocamlopt:01 -shared:01 -linkall:01 admittedly:01 phane:98 addin:98 addin:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 alain:01 Stéphane Glondu wrote: > Are there cases where ocamlopt -shared is useful without -linkall? Yes, I think so. First, of course, when you don't link any library in the .cmxs, only modules, then -linkall is not needed (but admittedly it wouldn't hurt). Second, imagine you want to create an addin that relies on code in a library which you want to embed in the addin. You don't necessarily want to link the whole library, just the modules which are needed. -- Alain