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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL 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 E62E0BBAF for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:42:39 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgcDAKf99kjAXQIniGdsb2JhbACTKD4BAQEVIqcWfimHIAEDAQODaQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,424,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="30418967" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 16 Oct 2008 17:42:31 +0200 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m9GFgRW6024453 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:42:30 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Aj8BADT99kjRVcbtlGdsb2JhbACTKD4BAQEBCQkMBxEDpxh+KYcgAQMBA4Np X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,424,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="18822263" Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.237]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 16 Oct 2008 17:42:29 +0200 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so72901rvb.57 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:42:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=l3PdgeDAas6C0GTmAYq5/uKuEHD7NEO/hTNuzKuGkO8=; b=h0xuTgikjPcyAk6rQJ3Uo7eQT2mlSRi7w64My6usTlFQZVBN1uIlfsCayybZEU/3pz sOeAmU5gYcVZDtSjBvFRYTm/Mnu15PLDqxxc+uchUcE85/UntYXpQ87CtmsHKx57OAIZ fXCMBlwQ+MIcDBCVm+Y137xZmAxyBMfNM7hSU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=LGoV6zuZCMfySMZKFd5t17P1w/xkkIh+HEudQj82KTlqpz8of64osA80xioZavah5o LIOCxRwjd6+K5wVNilcw4ASDdFDHRRcWzA8nVwJ9UfMR989yeX12EaSGLgPvxKFV5L0I AkN+H2ZDfXWPPFJq2QIMeFOtrcjxUORc6SpMo= Received: by 10.141.88.3 with SMTP id q3mr1698333rvl.94.1224171748392; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.82.18 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <666572260810160842r2101e56ta6fc8c9e5068950@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:42:28 +0200 From: Adrien To: "Alain Frisch" Subject: Re : [Caml-list] OCaml version 3.11.0+beta1 Cc: "David Allsopp" , "caml users" In-Reply-To: <48F73CEA.7070007@frisch.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <83E04F95-55DD-470E-9C6D-98FA15AE0CE0@inria.fr> <313592F47439468A85341BFF33508587@countertenor> <48F73CEA.7070007@frisch.fr> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 48F760E3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 frisch:01 frisch:01 ocaml:01 ocaml's:01 dependencies:01 compiler:01 compiler:01 ocamlrun:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 boot:01 dependency:01 dependency:01 alain:01 2008/10/16, Alain Frisch : > David Allsopp wrote: >> There seems to be an interesting chicken-and-egg source dependency between >> flexdll and OCaml 3.11 - you can't build OCaml 3.11 from source or use it >> afterwards without flexdll and you can't build flexdll from source without >> OCaml. Doesn't that suggest a binary copy of flexdll should be included in >> OCaml's boot directory? All of the other *binary* dependencies for Windows >> OCaml don't require OCaml themselves... just a thought! > > You're right about the circular dependency, but the answer is much > simpler than for the chicken-and-egg question: OCaml came first. > I don't see a compelling reason to include a binary version of flexdll > in the OCaml distribution. Just consider flexdll as an external > dependency that comes in binary form (like the MS C compiler). It just > happens to be produced by the OCaml compiler. > > Note that flexlink.exe can be compiler with an old OCaml compiler. Also, > if you insist to bootstrap everything, it shouldn't be too difficult to > get a minimal (=no dynamic linking of external C code) ocamlrun.exe for > 3.11 that does not require flexlink. > How often should we expect new releases of flexlink ? Basically, the question is : will it have to be updated from time to time or can we just drop it somewhere and forget everything about it ? --- Adrien Nader