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 EC25D7F860 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 01:13:02 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of anil@recoil.org) identity=pra; client-ip=89.16.177.154; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="anil@recoil.org"; x-sender="anil@recoil.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of anil@recoil.org) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=89.16.177.154; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="anil@recoil.org"; x-sender="anil@recoil.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@dark.recoil.org) identity=helo; client-ip=89.16.177.154; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="anil@recoil.org"; x-sender="postmaster@dark.recoil.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Au8IAO2YBlNZELGaY2dsb2JhbABZrQCXKIEmAxgVBj6CJgEFOiwTEAsSNEkBDQYTiAnNQheOZAeDJIEUAQOYMJVRPA X-IPAS-Result: Au8IAO2YBlNZELGaY2dsb2JhbABZrQCXKIEmAxgVBj6CJgEFOiwTEAsSNEkBDQYTiAnNQheOZAeDJIEUAQOYMJVRPA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,515,1389740400"; d="scan'208";a="59507909" Received: from recoil.dh.bytemark.co.uk (HELO dark.recoil.org) ([89.16.177.154]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with SMTP; 21 Feb 2014 01:13:02 +0100 Received: (qmail 12917 invoked by uid 634); 21 Feb 2014 00:06:20 -0000 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Check-By: dark.recoil.org Received: from cpc7-cmbg14-2-0-cust238.5-4.cable.virginm.net (HELO [192.168.1.62]) (86.30.244.239) (smtp-auth username remote@recoil.org, mechanism cram-md5) by dark.recoil.org (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:06:20 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1812\)) From: Anil Madhavapeddy In-Reply-To: <5306330F.1020401@inria.fr> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:06:21 +0000 Cc: Ocaml Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: References: <20140218185032.GA20593@notk.org> <5306330F.1020401@inria.fr> To: Xavier Leroy X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1812) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on dark.recoil.org Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [RFC] Remaining changes for cross-compilation support in OCaml On 20 Feb 2014, at 16:53, Xavier Leroy wrote: >> >> **************************** Further Goals **************************** >> - cross-compile the compiler: build a native Windows toolchain on Linux >> - canadian cross support: ${build}, ${target}, ${host} are all >> different, i.e. on Linux, build a toolchain that runs on Windows 64b >> but targets Windows 32b or a different architecture/OS like ARM Linux. > > That could be a nice touch if it's not too much extra work. The issue > was discussed at the last OCaml dev team meeting that Wojciech > attended, and we agreed that some scenarios were less important than > others, e.g. nobody really needs to compile from a 32-bit host for a > 64-bit target. This would actually be quite useful for Mirage compilation, since we've had quite a few (~10) reports of people attempting to compile up OCaml kernels intended for Xen (x86_64) using x86_32 host machines, with one brave chap even trying on an ARM32 Chromebook. The output kernels are spun up on a remote cloud service like Amazon or Rackspace, and so being flexible about the host machine is helpful. (This scenario is certainly less important than the 32-bit target for a 64-bit host, but I just thought I'd point it out) -anil