[Caml-list] build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin

[Caml-list] build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin

[derek.schutt]

Hi, I'm a new user of ocaml, and having some difficulties that are probably due
to my own ignorance.   Namely, ocamlrun doesn't seem to get produced when I
compile the code.

I've downloaded and tried to compile ocaml 3.12.0 on a 64-bit linux system
(Fedora 14, kernel 2.6.35.6-45.fc14.x86_64).	make world and make bootstrap
seem to work fine; here's the last bit of output from 'make bootstrap'.

make compare
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/ocaml-3.12.0'
Fixpoint reached, bootstrap succeeded.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/ocaml-3.12.0'

However, if I type 'ocaml', I get this response: 
bash: /usr/local/bin/ocaml: /usr/local/bin/ocamlrun: bad interpreter: No such
file or directory

This is no surprise, because only ocaml and ocamlc are installed in
/usr/local/bin.  As far as I can tell, ocamlrun is never created, nor are many
of the executable files listed in the INSTALL document, ocamlrun, ocamlyacc,
ocamllex, etc.

The output from 'configure' says these should be installed in /usr/local/bin: 

Directories where Objective Caml will be installed:
	binaries.................. /usr/local/bin
	standard library.......... /usr/local/lib/ocaml
	manual pages.............. /usr/local/man (with extension .1)

Can anyone help me?  I have to say I can't quite figure out what to try next.  
Thanks for your help.

Re: [Caml-list] build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin

[Andrew Psaltis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1778 bytes --]

On 2011-06-27 16:39, derek.schutt@colostate.edu wrote:
> Hi, I'm a new user of ocaml, and having some difficulties that are probably due
> to my own ignorance.   Namely, ocamlrun doesn't seem to get produced when I
> compile the code.
> 
> I've downloaded and tried to compile ocaml 3.12.0 on a 64-bit linux system
> (Fedora 14, kernel 2.6.35.6-45.fc14.x86_64).	make world and make bootstrap
> seem to work fine; here's the last bit of output from 'make bootstrap'.
> 
> make compare
> make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/ocaml-3.12.0'
> Fixpoint reached, bootstrap succeeded.
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/ocaml-3.12.0'
> 
> However, if I type 'ocaml', I get this response: 
> bash: /usr/local/bin/ocaml: /usr/local/bin/ocamlrun: bad interpreter: No such
> file or directory
> 
> This is no surprise, because only ocaml and ocamlc are installed in
> /usr/local/bin.  As far as I can tell, ocamlrun is never created, nor are many
> of the executable files listed in the INSTALL document, ocamlrun, ocamlyacc,
> ocamllex, etc.
> 
> The output from 'configure' says these should be installed in /usr/local/bin: 
> 
> Directories where Objective Caml will be installed:
> 	binaries.................. /usr/local/bin
> 	standard library.......... /usr/local/lib/ocaml
> 	manual pages.............. /usr/local/man (with extension .1)
> 
> Can anyone help me?  I have to say I can't quite figure out what to try next.  
> Thanks for your help.
> 

If you just want to skip compiling ocaml, you can install ocaml from the
Fedora repositories.  A simple

yum install ocaml

as root should do it.  There also are a large number of ocaml libraries
available in the repositories.  Check them out with

yum search ocaml

~Andrew


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 551 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin

[Derek Schutt]

Thanks Andrew, that is good to know.  I had looked on the ocaml web 
page, but didn't think to look in the usual repositories.

Incidentally, with the kind help of Matthieu Dubuget, my problem has 
been solved.  It was rather embarassing: I forgot to do "make install".

All is well.   Thanks everyone!

-Derek

On 06/27/2011 02:51 PM, Andrew Psaltis wrote:
> On 2011-06-27 16:39, derek.schutt@colostate.edu wrote:
>> Hi, I'm a new user of ocaml, and having some difficulties that are probably due
>> to my own ignorance.   Namely, ocamlrun doesn't seem to get produced when I
>> compile the code.
>>
>> I've downloaded and tried to compile ocaml 3.12.0 on a 64-bit linux system
>> (Fedora 14, kernel 2.6.35.6-45.fc14.x86_64).	make world and make bootstrap
>> seem to work fine; here's the last bit of output from 'make bootstrap'.
>>
>> make compare
>> make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/ocaml-3.12.0'
>> Fixpoint reached, bootstrap succeeded.
>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/ocaml-3.12.0'
>>
>> However, if I type 'ocaml', I get this response:
>> bash: /usr/local/bin/ocaml: /usr/local/bin/ocamlrun: bad interpreter: No such
>> file or directory
>>
>> This is no surprise, because only ocaml and ocamlc are installed in
>> /usr/local/bin.  As far as I can tell, ocamlrun is never created, nor are many
>> of the executable files listed in the INSTALL document, ocamlrun, ocamlyacc,
>> ocamllex, etc.
>>
>> The output from 'configure' says these should be installed in /usr/local/bin:
>>
>> Directories where Objective Caml will be installed:
>> 	binaries.................. /usr/local/bin
>> 	standard library.......... /usr/local/lib/ocaml
>> 	manual pages.............. /usr/local/man (with extension .1)
>>
>> Can anyone help me?  I have to say I can't quite figure out what to try next.
>> Thanks for your help.
>>
> If you just want to skip compiling ocaml, you can install ocaml from the
> Fedora repositories.  A simple
>
> yum install ocaml
>
> as root should do it.  There also are a large number of ocaml libraries
> available in the repositories.  Check them out with
>
> yum search ocaml
>
> ~Andrew
>

Re: [Caml-list] build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin

[Mihamina Rakotomandimby]

> On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 22:39:20 +0200
> derek.schutt@colostate.edu wrote:
> Hi, I'm a new user of ocaml,

Also note that there is a mailing list for "beginners":
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners/

-- 
RMA.

Re: [Caml-list] build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin

[Fabrice Le Fessant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 662 bytes --]

On 06/28/2011 06:47 AM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 22:39:20 +0200
>> derek.schutt@colostate.edu wrote:
>> Hi, I'm a new user of ocaml,
> 
> Also note that there is a mailing list for "beginners":
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners/

Looking at the other subjects in the "beginners" mailing-list, I was
surprised to see that most discussions would also fit the
"non-beginners" mailing-list (and vice-versa). Is it really necessary to
have two mailing-lists, especially when considering the traffic on both
lists ?

Maybe the "beginners" mailing-list could just be an alias to the
"caml-list" for shy people ?

Fabrice

[-- Attachment #2: fabrice_le_fessant.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 380 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn:Fabrice LE FESSANT
n:LE FESSANT;Fabrice
org:INRIA Saclay -- Ile-de-France;P2P & OCaml
adr;quoted-printable:;;Parc Orsay Universit=C3=A9 ;Orsay CEDEX;;91893;France
email;internet:fabrice.le_fessant@inria.fr
title;quoted-printable:Charg=C3=A9 de Recherche
tel;work:+33 1 74 85 42 14
tel;fax:+33 1 74 85 42 49 
url:http://fabrice.lefessant.net/
version:2.1
end:vcard

[Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Mihamina Rakotomandimby]

> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:46 +0200
> Fabrice Le Fessant <Fabrice.Le_fessant@inria.fr> wrote:

>  Is it really necessary to
> have two mailing-lists, especially when considering the traffic on
> both lists ?

I am also subscribed to the "beginners" list.
IMHO, it's useless to have 2 MLs.



-- 
RMA.

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Philippe Wang]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby
<mihamina@bbs.mg> wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:46 +0200
>> Fabrice Le Fessant <Fabrice.Le_fessant@inria.fr> wrote:
>
>>  Is it really necessary to
>> have two mailing-lists, especially when considering the traffic on
>> both lists ?
>
> I am also subscribed to the "beginners" list.
> IMHO, it's useless to have 2 MLs.

IMHO, currently, it's more "harmful" than "useless".
Or, perhaps it'd be relevant to have two mailing list:
-  a "normal" mailing list (which would be the result of combining
current caml-list and caml-beginners lists),
- and a "hackers" mailing list for those who want to hack with a tiny community.

Anyhow, the "default" mailing list being the one for hackers and
experimented users is, imho, very bad for OCaml.

-- 
Philippe Wang
   mail@philippewang.info

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Gabriel Scherer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1714 bytes --]

What I don't like with the current beginners list is that it is a yahoo
list. This means yet another painful "create an account" process to
subscribe, useless stuff added at the end of emails, and general an
unnecessary interface clutter added on top of an otherwise simple and
efficient communication tool.

Philippe, what do you mean by "hack with a tiny community", do you have
example of discussions that would be pertinent there? Why would it be
harmful to have them in the standard mailing list?

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Philippe Wang <mail@philippewang.info>wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby
> <mihamina@bbs.mg> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:46 +0200
> >> Fabrice Le Fessant <Fabrice.Le_fessant@inria.fr> wrote:
> >
> >>  Is it really necessary to
> >> have two mailing-lists, especially when considering the traffic on
> >> both lists ?
> >
> > I am also subscribed to the "beginners" list.
> > IMHO, it's useless to have 2 MLs.
>
> IMHO, currently, it's more "harmful" than "useless".
> Or, perhaps it'd be relevant to have two mailing list:
> -  a "normal" mailing list (which would be the result of combining
> current caml-list and caml-beginners lists),
> - and a "hackers" mailing list for those who want to hack with a tiny
> community.
>
> Anyhow, the "default" mailing list being the one for hackers and
> experimented users is, imho, very bad for OCaml.
>
> --
> Philippe Wang
>    mail@philippewang.info
>
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2661 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Mehdi Dogguy]

On 28/06/2011 14:17, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:46 +0200
>> Fabrice Le Fessant <Fabrice.Le_fessant@inria.fr> wrote:
> 
>>  Is it really necessary to
>> have two mailing-lists, especially when considering the traffic on
>> both lists ?
> 
> I am also subscribed to the "beginners" list.
> IMHO, it's useless to have 2 MLs.
> 

+1

I'd also like to see these two MLs merged into a single one.
Anyone knows who is administrating caml-beginners mailing-list?

Regards,

-- 
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Wojciech Meyer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Mehdi Dogguy <mehdi@dogguy.org> wrote:

> On 28/06/2011 14:17, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> >> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:58:46 +0200
> >> Fabrice Le Fessant <Fabrice.Le_fessant@inria.fr> wrote:
> >
> >>  Is it really necessary to
> >> have two mailing-lists, especially when considering the traffic on
> >> both lists ?
> >
> > I am also subscribed to the "beginners" list.
> > IMHO, it's useless to have 2 MLs.
> >
>
> +1
>

> I'd also like to see these two MLs merged into a single one.
> Anyone knows who is administrating caml-beginners mailing-list?
>
> Regards,
>

Yes, especially when they are so separated, subscribing to yahoo mailing
list is just not pleasant (frankly speaking I've not managed yet).
Beginners should be able to learn from more advanced users at zero
cost. Helping them is much easier when the posts arrive on one ML
instead of two, they would also have an access to the announcements
about new releases of the compiler and it's libraries. Bigger traffic is
better in this case (obviously to some limit, but I doubt we would have
this problem), it encourages people to join the discussions. If it's
only a historical reason to have yahoo based group and separate advanced
mailing list, then I admit I would like to see these two mailing list
merged. I think it's important in the days where OCaml is getting more
popular and having new people on the list is actually beneficial in long
term for OCaml community.

--

> Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
> http://dogguy.org/
>

Cheers;
Wojciech

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2504 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Christophe Raffalli]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 753 bytes --]


Hello,

May be one can have one mailing list with two addresses and a subject with
[Caml-list] or [Caml-list-beginners] So people that really don't want to see one
of the two kinds of traffic can filter ...

Cheers,
Christophe
-- 
Christophe Raffalli
Universite de Savoie
Batiment Le Chablais, bureau 21
73376 Le Bourget-du-Lac Cedex

tel: (33) 4 79 75 81 03
fax: (33) 4 79 75 87 42
mail: Christophe.Raffalli@univ-savoie.fr
www: http://www.lama.univ-savoie.fr/~RAFFALLI
---------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT: this mail is signed using PGP/MIME
At least Enigmail/Mozilla, mutt or evolution
can check this signature. The public key is
stored on www.keyserver.net
---------------------------------------------


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not

[Matteo Frigo]

Mehdi Dogguy <mehdi@dogguy.org> writes:

> Anyone knows who is administrating caml-beginners mailing-list?

The list was started by a gentleman called Ernesto Torresin, whom I know
personally and I have worked together with.  I think he is still running
it.  The last email address I have for him is <stalkern2@tin.it>, which
may or may not be current.  I can reach him through other channels if
necessary.

About ten years ago Ernesto was asked to continue the development of an
application for medical breath analysis that had been written in ocaml
under my supervision.  He had no formal training in computer science or
any other "scientific" discipline, but he soon became fascinated with
Ocaml because he thought it made a lot of sense from the perspective of
a linguist.  He didn't want to waste the time of Xavier and other
important people asking questions about reversing linked lists, and
therefore he started the ocaml-beginners Yahoo group where these
questions could be asked.

I don't have an opinion regarding whether the two lists should be merged
or not.  However, the original ocaml-beginners list was serving a
community of nonspecialists that was much larger than I thought existed.
Here "nonspecialist" means somebody who has never written a program
before, in any language.  Clearly the list was meeting a real need, and
users such as Ernesto should be taken into account in any decision on
this topic.

Regards,
Matteo Frigo

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Mihamina Rakotomandimby]

> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:35:58 +0200
> Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com> wrote:

> Philippe, what do you mean by "hack with a tiny community",

A kind of "ocaml-dev" mailing list, I think.
-- 
RMA.

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Philippe Wang]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Gabriel Scherer
<gabriel.scherer@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I don't like with the current beginners list is that it is a yahoo
> list. This means yet another painful "create an account" process to
> subscribe, useless stuff added at the end of emails, and general an
> unnecessary interface clutter added on top of an otherwise simple and
> efficient communication tool.

Ha! :D
I was looking for that mailing list at INRIA, so I had no chance of finding it!
Well, I gave up in less than 1 minute, so I didn't waste too much time.
It feels a bit like "beginners are not worth having a mailing list @INRIA". :-(

> Philippe, what do you mean by "hack with a tiny community", do you have
> example of discussions that would be pertinent there? Why would it be
> harmful to have them in the standard mailing list?

I believe that discussions about types that less than 1% of all ocaml
programmers understand, recursive functors (for these it must be even
worse), GC tweaking, etc. is "hacking".
I don't think it's harmful to have such discussions in the standard
mailing list.
But I think it's harmful that the standard mailing list gives priority
to such discussions rather than to beginners, even if I kind of prefer
the current situation for practical reasons.

However, I understand that some people don't want to have too many
beginners questions in their mailbox.
But it kind of also reflects that our community is not really willing
to grow (am I wrong? I hope so.).

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Christophe Raffalli
<christophe.raffalli@univ-savoie.fr> wrote:
> May be one can have one mailing list with two addresses and a subject with
> [Caml-list] or [Caml-list-beginners] So people that really don't want to see one
> of the two kinds of traffic can filter ...

I believe that would be good.


Cheers,
Philippe Wang

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Edgar Friendly]

On 06/28/2011 09:38 AM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> A kind of "ocaml-dev" mailing list, I think.
As far as I can tell, this kind of discussion takes place somewhere 
private.  Maybe inside INRIA, maybe with Caml Consortium members only.

I think it's a good idea to open things up, but this kind of change is 
likely not a 'build it and they will come' change.  Especially with 
OcamlPro working on compiler improvements, there's room for open 
discussions on improving OCaml the language and OCaml the base distribution.

E.

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Paolo Donadeo]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 15:41, Philippe Wang <mail@philippewang.info> wrote:
> I believe that discussions about types that less than 1% of all ocaml
> programmers understand, recursive functors (for these it must be even
> worse), GC tweaking, etc. is "hacking".
> I don't think it's harmful to have such discussions in the standard
> mailing list.
> But I think it's harmful that the standard mailing list gives priority
> to such discussions rather than to beginners, even if I kind of prefer
> the current situation for practical reasons.

100% agree.

Personally I consider discussions on garbage collecting recursive
functors very interesting, but keeping the two communities separate is
not a wise choice.


-- 
Paolo ⠠⠵

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Martin Jambon]

On 06/28/11 06:53, Paolo Donadeo wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 15:41, Philippe Wang <mail@philippewang.info> wrote:
>> I believe that discussions about types that less than 1% of all ocaml
>> programmers understand, recursive functors (for these it must be even
>> worse), GC tweaking, etc. is "hacking".
>> I don't think it's harmful to have such discussions in the standard
>> mailing list.
>> But I think it's harmful that the standard mailing list gives priority
>> to such discussions rather than to beginners, even if I kind of prefer
>> the current situation for practical reasons.
> 
> 100% agree.
> 
> Personally I consider discussions on garbage collecting recursive
> functors very interesting, but keeping the two communities separate is
> not a wise choice.

I suggest having two mailing lists:

- one list focused on using OCaml
- one list focused on improving OCaml

These two lists should be official and should use a single admin interface.


Note that there are currently 3 lists:
- caml-list at INRIA https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list (1330
members)
- ocaml-beginners at Yahoo!
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners/ (1112 members)
- ocaml-developer at Google
http://groups.google.com/group/ocaml-developer (205 members)


Martin

Re: [Caml-list] beginners or not (Was: build problem with 3.12.0; no ocamlrun in /usr/local/bin)

[Dario Teixeira]

Hi,

> I suggest having two mailing lists:
> 
> - one list focused on using OCaml
> - one list focused on improving OCaml
> 
> These two lists should be official and should use a single
> admin interface.

Just curious: is there someone who would be interested in the former
without also being interested in the latter?  Moreover, since the total
traffic of even the three combined sub-topics (beginners, using OCaml,
improving OCaml) is relatively low, it strikes me as unnecessarily
burdensome for users to maintain membership in yet another separate list.
Finally, it seems that many of the questions typical of absolute beginners
have found their way into Stack Overflow.  That should ease some of the
concerns of subscribers only to the caml-list about being confronted with
"silly" questions should the beginners list be merged into the caml-list.

Cheers,
Dario Teixeira