Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Build compiler distribution tools with $(EXE) extension from the start #7312

Closed
vicuna opened this issue Aug 1, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed

Comments

@vicuna
Copy link

vicuna commented Aug 1, 2016

Original bug ID: 7312
Reporter: @gasche
Assigned to: @shindere
Status: assigned (set by @shindere on 2016-12-13T08:44:13Z)
Resolution: open
Priority: normal
Severity: feature
Version: 4.03.0
Target version: later
Category: configure and build/install

Bug description

In #729

#729

Alain Frisch and Sébastien Hinderer remarked that currently, ocaml (and now ocamlnat) are built with the $(EXE) extension from the start, while most other tools are built without extensions and given an extension at install time.

It would be more consistent to build all tools directly with an $(EXE) extension.

Additional information

The makefile rules to have both (ocamlnat) and (ocamlnat$(EXE)) work as Makefile targets (so that "make ocamlnat" keeps working on Windows after the change) is a bit tricky to setup as just "ocamlnat: ocamlnat$(EXE)" could give an infinite loop, see

ocaml/Makefile.shared

Lines 326 to 334 in e1b57c4

# When the native toplevel executable has an extension (e.g. ".exe"),
# provide a phony 'ocamlnat' synonym
ifneq ($(EXE),)
.PHONY: ocamlnat
ocamlnat: ocamlnat$(EXE)
endif
ocamlnat$(EXE): compilerlibs/ocamlcommon.cmxa compilerlibs/ocamloptcomp.cmxa \

@vicuna
Copy link
Author

vicuna commented Nov 11, 2016

Comment author: @xavierleroy

If it's just a question of consistency, we could also build everything without the $(EXE) suffix. What are the pros and cons for building with $(EXE) from the start?

@vicuna
Copy link
Author

vicuna commented Nov 11, 2016

Comment author: @gasche

Sébastien's argument in the github discussion was as follows:

First it seems a bit more logical to me,
second and perhaps more concretely it lets one
run the executable without having to
install it outside of a Cygwin environment.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 9, 2020

This issue has been open one year with no activity. Consequently, it is being marked with the "stale" label. What this means is that the issue will be automatically closed in 30 days unless more comments are added or the "stale" label is removed. Comments that provide new information on the issue are especially welcome: is it still reproducible? did it appear in other contexts? how critical is it? etc.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label May 9, 2020
@shindere
Copy link
Contributor

shindere commented Jun 1, 2020 via email

@shindere
Copy link
Contributor

Fixed by #9652. Closing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants