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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21E56BC69 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 17:13:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from server2.thinkcrime.de (server2.thinkcrime.de [213.133.110.149]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l81FD6Gm011764 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 17:13:06 +0200 Received: from hod-sarge-2005-10.lan.m-e-leypold.de (dslb-088-072-245-206.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.72.245.206]) (Authenticated sender: hod-sarge-2005-10@server2) by server2.thinkcrime.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A75CF900265 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 17:12:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: by hod-sarge-2005-10.lan.m-e-leypold.de (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 34CC737962; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 17:25:23 +0200 (CEST) To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] MingW compiler (!) and Ocaml for Windows References: <46D86CC1.5090801@wp.pl> <46D8FD5A.2050005@mail.ru> <666572260709010303g352ee5e3xfbed05e76b721b32@mail.gmail.com> From: Markus E L Organization: N/A Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 17:25:23 +0200 In-Reply-To: <666572260709010303g352ee5e3xfbed05e76b721b32@mail.gmail.com> (camaradetux@gmail.com's message of "Sat, 1 Sep 2007 12:03:48 +0200") Message-ID: <2iejhi4dcs.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46D98182.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; mingw:01 compiler:01 ocaml:01 markus:01 ocaml:01 camlcvs:01 cvsweb:01 utils:01 ccomp:01 ccomp:01 mldonkey:01 mingw:01 compiler:01 libtool:01 libtool:01 Adrien wrote: > Hi, > > If I can read correctly, diversion is recent (i.e. ocaml 3.10) ( > http://camlcvs.inria.fr/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ocaml/utils/ccomp.ml.diff?r1=text&tr1=1.1&r2=text&tr2=1.20.4.8 > ). Aha! > > For the lazy ones, from ccomp.ml, > > if Sys.os_type = "Win32" && String.length s >= 256 > > then build_diversion lst > > else s > 256 is very low. When compiling ocaml, some commands are more than > 2100 chars and they don't fail. If there was a 256 character limit I > wouldn't compile much things (I can make opt.opt for ocaml and > mldonkey compiles completely). So you're already using 3.10 on Windows with MingW? Or am I reading you wrongly? And does that mean that the supposed problem is/was in the communication between Ocaml and the MingW compiler? >>>From this page: http://www.accesspdf.com/article.php/2005020713040824 > > What about Windows users who use the bash command shell, as packaged by > > MSYS? I couldn't find an immediate answer via Google, but I did find a script > > that tests this limit. It is used in the libtool configure script. > I changed it a little, > > and the results of my script (below) suggests you have at least 3145729 > > characters, or about 3MB. > > > This result differs from that cited in the libtool configure script > comments (256k > > character limit for the mingw environment). > > I'm sure 256 chars is not the true limit but 256k chars seems too > high. Conclusion ? =/ Oh no. The matter is completely confused. That is the conclusion. I think I'll have to do 2 things: Read and grep in the MingW gcc source and do the same with the last 2 or three ocaml versions. And then try to set up some test cases. That will take some time, so nobody expect any results soon :-). My initial hope was that somebody would remember a clear cut test case and the exact location where the problem is. I'm also a bit confused by MSYS creeping in here as a topic. Perhaps there are two different issues? The Ocaml-MingW problem can in my estimation only be one of building the right commandlines for the Mingw-Compiler. Information flow is from Ocaml to MingW and MingW gcc perhaps must understand @responsefile. The problem between MSYS and Ocaml must be the other way round: MSYS (shell) calls native Ocaml and when the command line gets too long it might use @responsefile, so Ocaml needs to understand it. I thought README.Win32 would refer to the first problem. Which would have to be fixed in MingW gcc and perhaps already is. But YMMV -- that is, I'm simply lacking information. > Btw, I am working on having ocaml work better under mingw. You can > have a look at this page : http://wiki.cocan.org/ocaml_mingw_port . It > doesn't work completely but mostly (in fact it may work for ocaml > 3.09). That's cool. I think we should pool efforts (well, as many effort as I can spare at the moment, that is, no promises). > Having a fully functionnal configure script is required for ocaml > features not to be determined by the lowest common factor which is > pretty low under win32... ? Didn't understand that. You're talking about building OCaml under Win32, not about comoiling with OCaml? Regards -- Markus