From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C452A7F2AA for ; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 02:13:25 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of jp.deplaix@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.212.182; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jp.deplaix@gmail.com"; x-sender="jp.deplaix@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of jp.deplaix@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.182 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.212.182; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jp.deplaix@gmail.com"; x-sender="jp.deplaix@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-wi0-f182.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.212.182; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jp.deplaix@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-wi0-f182.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AswBAPMfzVDRVdS2jWdsb2JhbAArGoJsXIJzuA8IFg4BAQEBCQkLCRIGI4IeAQEFIx0BGxwCAwwGBQsNAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECARERAQUBHAYBDAgBAYd8AQMPAQstnQWLZE+Ce4QNChknDVmIdgEBBAyBFos7BYMrgRMDlgqOaD+EFQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,291,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="186339180" Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 16 Dec 2012 02:13:25 +0100 Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id hn14so1233643wib.9 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2012 17:13:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ptgGBY9eGyitxzyBNsw+W3LNmqqgYzR0axMKhOZQa3g=; b=qxexjDl7GQ0dc+sjeUSYQbQcehcQFHuPqdobfv+8fruN+8o6KYPkxX6mKLQkdsCKWi xaiWqn07GFcXH4nYFdjH8N5xhnCcmdSDWwDO+mNW5PnuOEw0cLgUpuDsvQn33QVln5c1 PAGDojy16ww/2yhi9sOU/pxXixf+ouiV5bNJSWYjEXpEJ6lCX15Yrg48kDwGIgnjOUx5 dKlcDyb/VXD5crSci+9ilC+36umJxR8MJJb6ZJEWwqIfbD1y37bdVfjdhe+UqLkf9n5G 24QVSg5O/mm5aMVAyxp00JytrOTvcB2WTMCy+h63sP/IM3bhVJB6Mb8SxiEj3I7Mq780 //vQ== Received: by 10.180.97.98 with SMTP id dz2mr8707030wib.11.1355620405107; Sat, 15 Dec 2012 17:13:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a01:e35:242f:140:1a3d:a2ff:fe56:8f20? ([2a01:e35:242f:140:1a3d:a2ff:fe56:8f20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id eo10sm5149098wib.9.2012.12.15.17.13.23 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 15 Dec 2012 17:13:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50CD2032.1010404@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 02:13:22 +0100 From: Jacques-Pascal Deplaix User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dario Teixeira , OCaml mailing list References: <1355587355.56246.YahooMailNeo@web120405.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1355587355.56246.YahooMailNeo@web120405.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OASIS and conditional compilation On 12/15/2012 05:02 PM, Dario Teixeira wrote: > Hi, > > I've come across a perplexing issue with OASIS. I'm not sure if this is > just a bug or if I'm trying to push the tool beyond its design parameters. > > PG'OCaml can be compiled against either Batteries or ExtLib (the latter > mostly for legacy compatibility). To allow the harmonious coexistence of > the two options in the same system, the build system should allow for > the compilation of one or the two versions of the library side by side. > In OASIS-speak (I'm using version 0.3): > > Flag "batteries" > Description: Link PG'OCaml against Batteries > Default: true > > Flag "extlib" > Description: Link PG'OCaml against ExtLib > Default: true > > Library "pgocaml_batteries" > Build$: flag(batteries) > Install$: flag(batteries) > Path: src > Modules: PGOCaml, PGOCaml_generic > BuildDepends: unix, calendar, csv, pcre, batteries, camlp4.macro > ByteOpt+: -ppopt -DUSE_BATTERIES > NativeOpt+: -ppopt -DUSE_BATTERIES > FindlibContainers: pgocaml > Findlibname: batteries > XMETARequires: unix, calendar, csv, pcre, batteries > > Library "pgocaml_extlib" > Build$: flag(extlib) > Install$: flag(extlib) > Path: src > Modules: PGOCaml, PGOCaml_generic > BuildDepends: unix, calendar, csv, pcre, extlib, camlp4.macro > FindlibContainers: pgocaml > Findlibname: extlib > XMETARequires: unix, calendar, csv, pcre, extlib > > Note that the major difference is that "-ppopt -DUSE_BATTERIES" must be > passed to Camlp4 only when compiling the Batteries version. The problem > is that it's *always* passed, even if the "batteries" flag is disabled > by passing "--disable-batteries" to the configure script. > > Did I misinterpret something crucial about OASIS, or is this indeed a bug? > > Thanks in advance! > Best regards, > Dario Teixeira > > P.S. The full OASIS spec file can be viewed at this location: > https://forge.ocamlcore.org/scm/viewvc.php/branches/oasification/_oasis?revision=157&root=pgocaml > Hi, There is already a bug report for this: https://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1234&group_id=54&atid=291