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 mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6863E7F890 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 19:36:12 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net) identity=pra; client-ip=62.113.205.31; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net designates 62.113.205.31 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=62.113.205.31; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of postmaster@mx.etorok.net designates 62.113.205.31 as permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=62.113.205.31; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="postmaster@mx.etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AikFABx6MFM+cc0f/2dsb2JhbABZgwY7w0iBHhZ0giUBAQEEQDgCDwsYCRMDBAsJAwIBAgFFEwgCh3kJq1mEW58DEQaOOEkWhCKYToEykH+Bb4FAO4Eu X-IPAS-Result: AikFABx6MFM+cc0f/2dsb2JhbABZgwY7w0iBHhZ0giUBAQEEQDgCDwsYCRMDBAsJAwIBAgFFEwgCh3kJq1mEW58DEQaOOEkWhCKYToEykH+Bb4FAO4Eu X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,722,1389740400"; d="scan'208";a="64511232" Received: from mx.etorok.net ([62.113.205.31]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 24 Mar 2014 19:36:11 +0100 Received: by mx.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id b765257b; for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:36:09 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=etorok.net; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=ml; l=1171; bh=FXto17 z0PJLn5SOQ9v0ORgms1Ek=; b=tqJQiNh2YeCjw5/eKeNywI8QxUZmOM6K7cPsdQ V2uV7p/92+D6AJZUfmKpNn2szTpIvOpH1FoA8lPMySzQuo6wmVM9RrXFvvO+tN3b hG1P5x83NleGIOY81ZFg/s9r3Wm6nI6A6tnIsOx29d3MhlOJMwWeyuWPnr9/3nGg CU8Mw= Received: by mx.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id caf8b0c7; TLS version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO; for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:36:09 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <53307B19.9090907@etorok.net> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:36:09 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?T=F6r=F6k_Edwin?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr References: <532F8D40.4030007@riken.jp> <20140324083301.GE10374@annexia.org> <532FF7C6.8010608@riken.jp> <20140324110120.GM3162@annexia.org> <20140324110207.GA18751@annexia.org> In-Reply-To: <20140324110207.GA18751@annexia.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Anybody interested in creating binary RPMs for each official release of the compiler? On 03/24/2014 01:02 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 06:15:50PM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote: >> On 03/24/2014 05:33 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:41:20AM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote: >>>> I'm always annoyed when I have to wait ~20mn to install OCaml on a machine. >>>> >>>> Nowadays, thanks to OPAM, I think only a compiler is needed to >>>> bootstrap quickly an OCaml environment for developers. >>> >>> Binary RPMs for which distro? >> >> I am personally interested into: >> >> CentOS release 6.4 (Final) >> CentOS release 6.5 (Final) >> >> But ideally, any rpm-based distro should have access >> to the recent OCaml compilers, I fell (or I am just dreaming). > > We have to stick with the original OCaml compiler on RHEL releases > because of binary compatibility. Also EPEL policy doesn't allow us to > ship an upgrading OCaml compiler in EPEL, since we can't replace > packages from the original RHEL. What if you use a different package name? Apparently there are some RPMs for CentOS6 called ocaml4-*: http://pkgs.org/search/?query=ocaml4&type=smart Best regards, --Edwin