Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] CDK with Ocaml 3.06 (fwd)
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Sven LUTHER <luther@d...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] CDK with Ocaml 3.06 (fwd)
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 07:02:31AM +0200, Alessandro Baretta wrote:
> 
> 
> Sven LUTHER wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 12:44:57AM +0200, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> >
> >>- Authors usually cannot test source packages on lots of platforms. 
> >>Problems
> >> range from /bin/sh incompatibilities to the Unix/Windows nightmare. 
> >> Especially
> >> for the latter I really don't know how to cope with it, because porting
> >> Makefiles and scripts to Windows is time-intensive, and as a Unix fan
> >> I have the attitude "let the Windows users do it".
> >
> >
> >At least for the windows solution, i strongly think a binary
> >distribution mechanism is what is needed for the users and also would
> >save a lot of time and 'howto build' kind of questions on the mailing
> >lists. There is no reason not to do so, i am no windows expert, but
> >windows offer a stable set of libraries and other system component that
> >can be relied upon to install ocaml binary packages upon. This already
> >works for ocaml itself.
> >
> 
> Very true, but I have a feeling most users/developers are on 
> 'nixes and don't really give a dime about Windows. I expect 
> most people to be willing to release their working 
> sources--working on their flavor of unix--but not to work on 
> creating a Windows distro, be it source or binary. I also 
> don't expect anyone, say, of the Debian folks, to pick up 
> the Windows-port crusage single-handedly.

A, no, i don't think we are going to be willing to do this, altough to
be honest, i spend very little time under windows, well almost none, but
when i go there to check if my program also run under windows, i very
much like to have everything directly installable and working, without
having to worry how to build stuff and such.

So there is an interest here.

Disclaimer: in this, i am speaking solely for me, not for the rest of
the debian/ocaml team.

> Let's just say this is a pretty nasty topic. I have a 
> feeling that the only solution would be to have an official 
> O'Caml IDE à la DevStudio--eeek!--capable of handling 
> compilation and packaging in just the right way wherever 
> it's used, without resorting to such unix tools as /bin/sh, 
> configure, make and whatnot, but this would fit better in a 
> commercial project than in an open source project.

No, the right way is to make a binary distribution, with someone (inria
or the consortium) building the libraries and ocaml and making it easily
available. This would maybe need someone devoting its time to port
widely used non inria software, or nag the authors of it to fix windows
build whenever possible.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners