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 mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E4197F919 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 20:45:58 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:hxjEqRYOK85g8zS+4v7QlwT/LSx+4OfEezUN459isYplN5qZpM67bnLW6fgltlLVR4KTs6sC0LqH9fu8EjVavN6oizMrTt9lb1c9k8IYnggtUoauKHbQC7rUVRE8B9lIT1R//nu2YgB/Ecf6YEDO8DXptWZBUiv2OQc9HOnpAIma153xjLDjvcaPKFwS2XKUWvBbElaflU3prM4YgI9veO4a6yDihT92QdlQ3n5iPlmJnhzxtY+a9Z9n9DlM6bp6r5YTGY2zRakzTKRZATI6KCh1oZSz7ViQezCS/WMRWXk6lR9BAg6NrE2rH8S5jiyv/MB6xTWbOcn3QKpwEQyj4r1xRVWg3B8GOiQj/Vb9jdFsjaZfoR+7jxx62MjUaZuLPeByOK7RYIVJa3BGW5NOVy1dD5qhZpEMR74ePedEopDgrkENhQS+BBWhHf7m0DwOgWX5i/5pm989GB3LiVRzV+kFt27Z+ZCobao= Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=whitequark@whitequark.org; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=whitequark@whitequark.org; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@mail.whitequark.org Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of whitequark@whitequark.org) identity=pra; client-ip=176.58.103.125; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-sender="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of whitequark@whitequark.org designates 176.58.103.125 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=176.58.103.125; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-sender="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.whitequark.org) identity=helo; client-ip=176.58.103.125; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.whitequark.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CwBAAaWj9X/31nOrBeDoN/fYJ1phqSfSKFbwKBcxABAQEBAQEBAWQngi2CFQEBAQMBIw8BBTQCBAQDEAQHCQ8CAgkdAgIsGRIGEwgKiAMDDwwKsmqNBAOENAEBAQEGAQEBASOBAYUjgy+BH4QogxiCWQWGQAyRaIIdg2OCeIUhgj6MZY9LNyuDMjs8MogDAQEB X-IPAS-Result: A0CwBAAaWj9X/31nOrBeDoN/fYJ1phqSfSKFbwKBcxABAQEBAQEBAWQngi2CFQEBAQMBIw8BBTQCBAQDEAQHCQ8CAgkdAgIsGRIGEwgKiAMDDwwKsmqNBAOENAEBAQEGAQEBASOBAYUjgy+BH4QogxiCWQWGQAyRaIIdg2OCeIUhgj6MZY9LNyuDMjs8MogDAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,340,1459807200"; d="scan'208";a="178492381" Received: from fehu.whitequark.org (HELO mail.whitequark.org) ([176.58.103.125]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 May 2016 20:45:57 +0200 Received: by mail.whitequark.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 9273810CA78; Fri, 20 May 2016 18:45:55 +0000 (UTC) To: "Boutillier, Pierre" X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1000:rcube.php MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 18:45:55 +0000 From: whitequark Cc: caml-list@inria.fr In-Reply-To: <9D53A509-55BC-4E89-A8CF-389EE20580DD@hms.harvard.edu> References: <9D53A509-55BC-4E89-A8CF-389EE20580DD@hms.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <77d8e9183ed929e80464c70376561cd8@whitequark.org> X-Sender: whitequark@whitequark.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.1.5 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] opam-cross-windows On 2016-05-20 18:38, Boutillier, Pierre wrote: > Hi list, > > Sorry to: > - reactivate an old thread > - maybe going into human-relation issue (hopefully not) > > On github live: > https://github.com/whitequark/opam-cross-windows > and > https://github.com/vouillon/opam-windows-repository > > Both are active (9 days old commit vs 10 days old commit). One has > yojson, the other (a bit old) lwt. I sit in the middle. > Could you give me insight of technical design choice differences (i > don't see) in order to allow me to decide in which direction I should > put my energy toward helping a "merge"? My repository uses MXE so that a wide range of native dependencies can be easily compiled. Moreover, you get opam-cross-android and opam-cross-ios for free, with exact same conventions, largely similar package sets, etc, and it is easy to port packages between the three as well. Also, Jerome has expressed a desire to merge the opam-cross-* repositories but that didn't go anywhere so far. > > All the best, > Pierre B. > > >> Le 13 mars 2016 à 05:02, whitequark a >> écrit : >> >> Hi all, >> >> I've released opam-cross-windows[1], a 4.02.3 OCaml toolchain >> in the spirit of opam-cross-android[2] (ex opam-android). >> It provides easy cross-compilation of the OCaml compiler >> and select packages from any *nix environment to 32-bit >> and 64-bit x86 Windows. >> >> There aren't many packages yet but you're encouraged to submit >> your own. Personally, I find the porting process that uses >> the opam-cross-* conventions so simple and robust that it >> can be done nearly mindlessly. >> >> The cross-compiled package definitions themselves are >> identical to the ones from opam-cross-android (except for >> s/android/windows) so I think cross-compilation should gain >> at least minimal OPAM support; I've described my proposal >> at [3]. >> >> [1]: https://github.com/whitequark/opam-cross-windows >> [2]: https://github.com/whitequark/opam-cross-android >> [3]: https://github.com/ocaml/opam/issues/2476 >> >> -- >> whitequark >> >> -- >> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: >> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list >> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners >> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs -- whitequark