Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff

From: skaller (skaller@maxtal.com.au)
Date: Fri Feb 25 2000 - 17:58:42 MET

Next message: Claudio Sacerdoti Coen: "Re: symbol managment in Caml"

Previous message: skaller: "Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff"
In reply to: Alan Schmitt: "Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff"
Next in thread: Juergen Pfitzenmaier: "Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Alan Schmitt wrote:

> Now if you would be so kind as to explain what better solution you
> have compared to makefiles, I'm all ears.

See my previous email. I have no end of problems installing
things (in general) as source. Ocaml is a pleasant exception,
it is very easy to build.

BTW: please think about configuration management and installation for
a second: it is well known to be a nightmare on all systems.
Specialists are employed by most companies with more than few boxes
just to keep them running and maintain the software configuration.
I think it's obvious on reflection that this is a really difficult
problem, and there really has to be something a lot better than
make and friends.

-- 
John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net

Next message: Claudio Sacerdoti Coen: "Re: symbol managment in Caml"
Previous message: skaller: "Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff"
In reply to: Alan Schmitt: "Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff"
Next in thread: Juergen Pfitzenmaier: "Re: Portability of applications written in OCAML: C stuff"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 25 2000 - 18:16:42 MET