Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] a question on packaging
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-02-13 (05:59)
From: doug@b...
Subject: [Caml-list] a question on packaging
I would like to offer a small module I've written for benchmarking.
But I also have some questions, since I've never done this before.
A compressed tarball is here:

This module is a fairly straight-forward port of the Perl Benchmark
module, which allows you to measure and compare the run-time of
functions.  There is some ocamldoc style documentation included.

I have seen some other packages use autoconf, or custom makefiles,
sometimes with findlib (which I haven't really explored yet). Some
modules seem to install in /usr/local/lib/ocaml and some in +contrib.

I took the route of using Markus' fine OcamlMakefile, extending it with
some extra stuff for what I need. So, for example, it will install in
/usr/local/lib/ocaml/contrib by default, but you can override that by
defining an environment variable, as I briefly explain in the INSTALL
file. I honestly have no idea if what I've done will work on Windows, I
don't have an easy way of finding out right now.

Do people think that strategy is sufficient? Is there a best way to
package up a module for distribution? Would others like to see OCaml
offer a standard method of packaging, distributing, and building
modules? (It's becoming quite popular to offer this, for example,
Perl and Xemacs offer standard packaging systems). I believe I saw
one or more messages in the archives on this subject, so maybe it's
not just me.

Anyway, I would appreciate any feedback, whether it's about the
benchmark module, or issues of packaging a module. Thanks.

Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: