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] "No bytecode specified"
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-08-27 (06:25)
From: Sven LUTHER <luther@d...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] "No bytecode specified"
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 12:00:31PM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote:
> > Alternatively, strip can be fixed to know about ocaml bytecode.
> I wouldn't recommend that -- if I were the maintainer of "strip", I'd
> scream at such a kludge :-)


That said, maybe strip has a list of things not to strip or something
such ?

> > I was also told that if the ocaml team would have used another
> > label/tag/whatever it is called in the binary code than the one it is
> > using, then strip would know about it.
> Yes, a cleaner solution would be to embed the OCaml bytecode in a
> special ELF section.  But there are two problems with this: 1- the ELF
> file format is quite complex, and 2- this solution would break utterly
> on non-ELF systems, e.g. Windows.

Ok, you know a lot more than me about this, but couldn't it not be
possible to implement this only on ELF systems ?
Anyway, the resulting code is arch/system dependant, since you embed
it with ocamlrun anyway, is it not ?

> The current solution (just stick the bytecode at the end of the native
> executable) is a hack, but it's a hack that works on *every single
> platform* I've tested in the last 12 years...

Sure, a good reason for it i guess, but the result is that strip breaks
ocaml bytecode executables.


Sven Luther
To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: