Re: [Caml-list] Some comments on recent discussions

[Jonathan Protzenko <jonathan.protzenko@gmail.com>]

My feeling is that the core issue lies in the fact that we want two 
different styles: the Unix environment, and the Windows way.
- The first one, imho, currently very well served by the cygwin 
environment + official ocaml package for cygwin.
- The second one would be best served by an installer that bundles, as 
Alain said, ocaml binaries, flexlink binaries, and enough from 
mingw/msys so that native compilation works (without providing the 
entire environment, though).

The latter approach doesn't seem to be too hard, as the installer I 
built earlier provides most of it (although you're required to install 
mingw/msys by yourself right now).

Alain, others, how does that sound? We're somehow not talking about the 
cygwin + mingw64 combo that you enabled earlier on trunk, but as long as 
it's the "official way to compile", we can assume users who do want this 
are ready to take the matter into their own hands and compile OCaml if 
they want this very specific combo. The same goes for MSVC builds.

On 12/14/2011 01:52 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> There could be an alternative: The "busybox approach". We could develop
> a toolkit that covers all the Unix commands we need for the existing
> build scripts.
I don't think we have the manpower available here to re-build an entire 
toolkit. Besides, I think that's the whole point of msys.

Cheers,

jonathan