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 AA7A27EE51 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 00:10:34 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of mmatalka@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.215.179; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-sender="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of mmatalka@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.179 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.215.179; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-sender="mmatalka@gmail.com"; 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-ea0-f179.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.215.179; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-ea0-f179.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlsBAON7plHRVdezk2dsb2JhbABagmjCWIEKFg4BAQEBBwsLCRQEJIIjAQEEAUABGx0BAwELBgULDQkeBw8BBA8RAQUBCxcTh3oBAwkGAZt9jD+CfYRyChknDAFYiCIBBQyPBweDVwOXO49bP4Q1 X-IPAS-Result: AlsBAON7plHRVdezk2dsb2JhbABagmjCWIEKFg4BAQEBBwsLCRQEJIIjAQEEAUABGx0BAwELBgULDQkeBw8BBA8RAQUBCxcTh3oBAwkGAZt9jD+CfYRyChknDAFYiCIBBQyPBweDVwOXO49bP4Q1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,766,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="16126736" Received: from mail-ea0-f179.google.com ([209.85.215.179]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 30 May 2013 00:10:34 +0200 Received: by mail-ea0-f179.google.com with SMTP id z16so5799718ead.24 for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 15:10:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=Ll6pLg3qzt/Te0Yces0sAN8mMwjv0yBxNmnBf0xlCLI=; b=TNjq7kvpeP18nIqIIFn3OyrVdGD8LM8lKug8CJ/zwbVBf77+H+Vv/jrC7eizPYF2jj FLyIDBF+EGJx5FozFwGvGSuoIDD5JBB3owfRmuE9QehSna2rwAEqyBlGVE/mDdjXHQ0x aKMlfmQLStsIKBgcG0/Odvb4P52AGu8sXcSmA2m2VMJyraz1HTii4Fj/aEIIycWVoFl+ rnT1/1Kgu9vlrl3iN0kd0g50BiM8tEKjnaJXV+has1VXmh692KBB29FDuWkWGS2wMzBF xawkmEtH2rxRgcW02PiVY+sU9yshj2aAX5mLLEDLiIq+sQkKGvarkp8Q+6zukl6JVwXh rbUw== X-Received: by 10.15.76.9 with SMTP id m9mr6725866eey.146.1369865433396; Wed, 29 May 2013 15:10:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:fe70:2696]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y2sm56540448eeu.2.2013.05.29.15.10.29 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 29 May 2013 15:10:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Malcolm Matalka To: "Mr. Herr" Cc: caml-list@inria.fr References: <20130523235355.GI6510@siouxsie> <20130526150008.GA2014@siouxsie> <20130526234911.41866xca7wgoirfb@webmail.in-berlin.de> <51A30E01.5070300@freenet.de> <51A3C03C.4000205@freenet.de> <51A3C3D6.9020003@etorok.net> <51A3CBBD.8040609@freenet.de> <51A4052F.7000700@riken.jp> <51A4F822.8070407@freenet.de> <51A52CE3.6060002@freenet.de> <51A669A9.2070505@freenet.de> <87r4gppk3k.fsf@gmail.com> <51A67AE2.2000000@freenet.de> Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 22:10:29 +0000 In-Reply-To: <51A67AE2.2000000@freenet.de> (Herr's message of "Thu, 30 May 2013 00:02:10 +0200") Message-ID: <87ehcpphd6.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: Problems to get larger user base ... (Re: [Caml-list] OCaml's variables) In the case of scripting, the script has to run as a user, so its environment can be setup properly. "Mr. Herr" writes: > Is Ocaml scripting totally out? Yet I read about a project to produce a native toplevel. > > I bet even in byte code Ocaml is on par with a lot of other scripting/programming > languages. > > /Str. > > Am 29.05.2013 23:11, schrieb Malcolm Matalka: >> Why would you need to roll out opem libraries for production? You >> should build a binary and distribute the binary to the machines. >> >> I prefer per-user install. I have, numerous times, felt suffocated on >> systems that require going through some bureaucracy to install a package >> (which is one reason I use NixOS everywhere I can). >> >> /M >> >> "Mr. Herr" writes: >> >>> Am 29.05.2013 00:43, schrieb Paolo Donadeo: >>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Mr. Herr >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> I see, this is over and out. Very constructive. >>>> >>>> >>>> Mr. Herr, sorry for the irony, so I'll be serious, as you wish. >>>> >>>> What kind of constructive comment can you realistically expect in reply to "Linux >>>> is a server"? >>>> >>>> Linux is an operating system, not a "server", nor a "service". I spend 99% of my >>>> programming time on a Linux box since 20 years, and the only services running here >>>> are the system services like CUPS. The choice of OPAM's designers to install >>>> everything in the user home directory has been explained by Anil very clearly. >>>> >>>> I only add that I always installed GODI in ~/.godi rather than in /opt . >>>> >>>> Your comment was inaccurate, so my reply is ironical, but not harsh. >>>> >>>> >>> Indeed "Linux is a server" is not well said. >>> >>> I meant to say "Linux is a multiuser system" and it has always been, so one can >>> reasonably expect software installation to deal with it with ease. >>> >>> There are certainly advantages in the ~/.opam design decision, but I have yet to find >>> out how to roll out my ~/.opam libraries for production. >>> >>> And very true, I was not prepared for irony on this point. >>> >>> /Str.