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 40C0281799 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 09:07:14 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of dra-news@metastack.com) identity=pra; client-ip=81.103.221.52; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-sender="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Neutral (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of dra-news@metastack.com does not assert whether or not 81.103.221.52 is permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=81.103.221.52; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-sender="dra-news@metastack.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@mtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com) identity=helo; client-ip=81.103.221.52; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="dra-news@metastack.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvYBADsf8lFRZ900nGdsb2JhbABagmWBJr1DgRUWDgEBAQEBCAsJCRQogiQBAQEDATpPAgEIGAoUEDIlAgQTCIgCBwO5II9MOIMSbgOUCINXlGGCKg X-IPAS-Result: AvYBADsf8lFRZ900nGdsb2JhbABagmWBJr1DgRUWDgEBAQEBCAsJCRQogiQBAQEDATpPAgEIGAoUEDIlAgQTCIgCBwO5II9MOIMSbgOUCINXlGGCKg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,748,1367964000"; d="scan'208";a="22311752" Received: from mtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.52]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 26 Jul 2013 09:07:13 +0200 Received: from aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20130726070712.YAEK22777.mtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 08:07:12 +0100 Received: from romulus.metastack.com ([81.98.252.242]) by aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.3.00.04.00 201-2196-133-20080908) with ESMTP id <20130726070712.OJBJ2660.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@romulus.metastack.com> for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 08:07:12 +0100 Received: from remus.metastack.local (remus.metastack.com [172.16.0.1]) by romulus.metastack.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id r6Q779B3012456 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 08:07:10 +0100 Received: from Remus.metastack.local ([fe80::547c:3c42:e1da:eda2]) by Remus.metastack.local ([fe80::547c:3c42:e1da:eda2%10]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 08:07:08 +0100 From: David Allsopp To: caml-list Thread-Topic: [Caml-list] which ocaml build system Thread-Index: AQHOhrr0fN1mss/GHUaO1NyDIV0kPZlyNgIAgAOsMwCAADlVAIAAQIKAgAAM0ACAABFgAIAAFQeQ Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:07:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <51ECF4EB.1060301@libertysurf.fr> <1672419877.217810363.1374484053368.JavaMail.root@zimbra27-e5.priv.proxad.net> <20130723153956.605104b3@xivilization.net> <51F1CC76.60802@riken.jp> <20130726054658.GA20086@notk.org> <20130726064910.GA13198@dell.happyleptic.org> In-Reply-To: <20130726064910.GA13198@dell.happyleptic.org> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.16.0.18] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Organization: MetaStack Solutions Ltd. X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.65 on 172.16.0.20 X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=GaEGOwq9FwezmTggA+b6yC6zDZF2HYaK6RN/tSqdnVA= c=1 sm=0 a=IXlcok0kcmcA:10 a=1dBuw7TmN_8A:10 a=cTs9vV391PwA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=WtMADFcyAAAA:8 a=q-uK0yJcL6Hl4BUs-WcA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=Rc5NFjuuoNsA:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 Subject: RE: [Caml-list] which ocaml build system rixed@happyleptic.org wrote: > -[ Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 07:46:58AM +0200, Adrien Nader ]---- > > > make -j should work. Only if the Makefile has been written with parallel execution in mind - it'= s very easy to produce rules which have hidden dependencies encoded in the = order of the prerequisites (and which can be darned hard to debug...). Pers= onally, I'd never assume that a Makefile will automatically work with -j (t= hough I do agree that build systems should be written for parallel executio= n from day 0). > > You depend on ocamldep however and it has some issues (it's a fairly > > simple tool that can get things wrong). >=20 > Many makefiles have a distinct target for dependencies, which helps here > (iff the deps do not change very often). Phasing out ocamldep also helps > wrt recompilation speed. What do you mean by phasing out ocamldep? An alternate tool, handwritten de= pendencies (ouch) or something more complex? David=20