Re: unison-2.10.2-1 and unison-gtk2-2.10.2-1

[Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha at cs dot nyu dot edu>]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Andrew Schulman wrote:

> >> I decided to go ahead and build a lablgtk2 package myself, so I can
> >> reasonably maintain it in the future.
> >
> > One thing to note (and I haven't noticed it before myself) is that my
> > build of ocaml contains labltk -- will they conflict?
>
> No, I don't think so.  lablgtk2 goes entirely into /usr/lib/ocaml/lablgtk2
> and /usr/lib/ocaml/stublibs, plus one file /usr/bin/lablgtk2.

Good.  I haven't had a chance to look at your packaging, sorry.

> > Also, you will probably need to include bits of the ocaml sources in
> > your lablgtk2 source package -- do we want to replicate this?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean.  The user will have to install ocaml first in
> order to build from source.  Is anything more required?

Is that "ocaml source", or "ocaml binary package"?  The tradition for
Cygwin packages is to either have self-contained sources, or to share the
sources for some packages (via the "external-source:" directives).  It's
unusual for one source package to depend on another.  Although...  The
"cygwin" source package depends on the "mingw" and "w32api" sources, so I
guess it would be ok.

> > Here's a (reformatted) excerpt from driver/main_args.ml in the ocaml
> > sources:
> >  "-w", Arg.String F._w,
> >     <flags>  Enable or disable warnings according to <flags>:
> > [snip]
> >        S/s enable/disable non-unit statement
> > [snip]
> > So it looks like "-w s" disables non-unit statement warnings.
>
> OK, thanks.  I couldn't find this.

FWIW, you can get the same output from "ocamlmktop -help" or "ocaml
-help".

> >> Questions:  should I just give up on stripping the executable?  Or is
> >> there a workaround?  Do I need the -w option at all?  Sorry, but I know
> >> almost nothing about OCaml or LablGTK.
> >
> > It's up to you.  I'm guessing this is supposed to enable clean execution
> > of lablgtk2 (i.e., no extraneous messages), so you probably do need it.

Oops.  This was too vague.  The "it's up to you" part was for the "-w"
option -- I think you can't really strip ocaml executables and expect them
to work.  Don't strip.

> OK.  I may fool around with it to see how many errors I get if I strip the
> exe and remove '-w s', but I'm inclined to leave it alone.

Wise decision.

> > One last note is that the current release of ocaml doesn't support dynamic
> > library loads, so a lot of examples don't work (details upon request).
> > I'm working on fixing this, but if anyone has suggestions on how to enable
> > shared library support, I'd be interested in hearing them.
>
> OK.  No obvious problem there for my package, since I'm not building the
> examples.

Great.  No objections from me, then.  As soon as it's reviewed...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing
whatever you think is worth doing."  -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw