From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF130BBAF for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 10:03:32 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlEFAE+H/UxQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACVKY4SFQEBFiIiwCiFSQSFHIVV X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,310,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="82155602" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2010 10:03:32 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PPtSN-0004iO-DZ for caml-list@inria.fr; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:03:31 +0100 Received: from avelizy-155-1-50-177.w86-217.abo.wanadoo.fr ([86.217.25.177]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:03:31 +0100 Received: from sylvain by avelizy-155-1-50-177.w86-217.abo.wanadoo.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:03:31 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Sylvain Le Gall Subject: Re: Pre-compiled ocaml binary for windows Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 09:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20101203200646.GA7445@malaquias.DHCP-GERAL> <6C7D3CF0-5C04-4E51-939F-5086244DA055@inria.fr> <4CFD2259.6060200@gmail.com> <4CFDEE7E.8030000@frisch.fr> X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: avelizy-155-1-50-177.w86-217.abo.wanadoo.fr User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-18 (Linux) X-Spam: no; 0.00; le-gall:01 pre-compiled:01 ocaml:01 frisch:01 frisch:01 ocaml:01 findlib:01 toplevel:01 ocamlopt:01 toolchain:01 mingw:01 ocamlopt:01 toolchain:01 masm:01 lexifi's:01 Hello, On 07-12-2010, Alain Frisch wrote: > On 12/07/2010 01:24 AM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: >> Here is the list so far: >> 1. no build system setup : Martin who first did the packaging, didn't >> have included how to build ocaml/findlib neither the binaries itself. >> So basically you need to build by hand to generate the .msi. This is >> not a big issue but for a collective effort it is better to have a >> common way to build the binaries >> 2. some environment variables are not set and make ocaml crash (AFAIR, we >> doesn't set OCAMLIB) >> 3. we don't ship the graphical toplevel >> 4. I am still not sure how to deal with ActiveTCL + OCaml (because of the >> ActiveTCL license) >> 5. Total lack of documentation > > Do you plan to support ocamlopt? If yes, the users will have to install > a toolchain (at least, an assembler+linker). Mingw has the advantage of > producing binaries that depend only on msvcrt.dll (available on any > fresh Windows installation), not on a specific version of > msvcr80.dll/msvcr90.dll. But Windows users might prefer to install a > version of VS Express or a Windows SDK. We will provide ocamlopt (32/64 bits). But indeed, the toolchain can be an issue (esp. masm). I plan to use VS2008. Maybe the native Lexifi's amd64/x86 backend is a better option. If we are able to use this backend, we still have to use a linker ? > > Not building labltk seems ok. As for the graphical toplevel, I think > there are some pending bugs (random crashes) with the current version > under recent versions of Windows, so it's probably better not to include > it. Some support for installing the emacs mode automatically and/or a > version of ledit would be useful replacements. > I didn't known this fact. This is another reason for not building labltk. Since I almost never use it, I don't think it will be a big loose. I will probably look for ledit (or lwt toplevel) which seems a better alternative to emacs (too heavy too install). Regards, Sylvain Le Gall