From rjones at redhat.com Tue Feb 12 16:41:34 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:41:34 +0000 Subject: OCaml 3.10.1 Message-ID: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> Anyone object to me pushing ocaml 3.10.1 + all new packages to Rawhide? Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rjones at redhat.com Tue Feb 12 18:35:16 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:35:16 +0000 Subject: OCaml 3.10.1 In-Reply-To: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> References: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> Message-ID: <47B1E6E4.2040806@redhat.com> Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Anyone object to me pushing ocaml 3.10.1 + all new packages to Rawhide? As I'm creating new packages, I will upload them here so others can test them out: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/fedora-ocaml-3.10.1/ It's all been fairly smooth so far. I'm also using this opportunity to upgrade to the latest versions of packages. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From gemi at bluewin.ch Tue Feb 12 19:05:03 2008 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:05:03 +0100 Subject: OCaml 3.10.1 In-Reply-To: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> References: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1202843103.3598.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 16:41 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Anyone object to me pushing ocaml 3.10.1 + all new packages to > Rawhide? We leave F-7 and F-8 out, don't we? From rjones at redhat.com Tue Feb 12 19:05:47 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:05:47 +0000 Subject: OCaml 3.10.1 In-Reply-To: <1202843103.3598.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> <1202843103.3598.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <47B1EE0B.5070107@redhat.com> G?rard Milmeister wrote: > On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 16:41 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> Anyone object to me pushing ocaml 3.10.1 + all new packages to >> Rawhide? > We leave F-7 and F-8 out, don't we? Yeah, that'll break too much stuff don't you think?g Best to save such fundamental updates for Rawhide. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From laxathom at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 12 20:04:31 2008 From: laxathom at fedoraproject.org (Xavier Lamien) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:04:31 +0100 Subject: OCaml 3.10.1 In-Reply-To: <47B1E6E4.2040806@redhat.com> References: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> <47B1E6E4.2040806@redhat.com> Message-ID: <62bc09df0802121204w17b08b0dy917e20e993582c6d@mail.gmail.com> 2008/2/12, Richard W.M. Jones : > > Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Anyone object to me pushing ocaml 3.10.1 + all new packages to Rawhide? > > As I'm creating new packages, I will upload them here so others can test > them out: > > http://www.annexia.org/tmp/fedora-ocaml-3.10.1/ > > It's all been fairly smooth so far. > > I'm also using this opportunity to upgrade to the latest versions of > packages. > > Rich. Great, just go on ;) Feel free to mail me or comment on the related bug, i'll then check them and finalise. Thanks Richards, -- > Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ > Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod > Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in > England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 > > -- Xavier.t Lamien -- French Fedora Ambassador Fedora/EPEL Contributor | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rjones at redhat.com Tue Feb 12 21:09:16 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:09:16 +0000 Subject: OCaml 3.10.1 In-Reply-To: <62bc09df0802121204w17b08b0dy917e20e993582c6d@mail.gmail.com> References: <47B1CC3E.9050002@redhat.com> <47B1E6E4.2040806@redhat.com> <62bc09df0802121204w17b08b0dy917e20e993582c6d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47B20AFC.2000607@redhat.com> Alright, I've pushed just ocaml 3.10.1. Need to wait for it to rebuild before I can start rebuilding anything else, so this will deliberately break everything in Rawhide. In the meantime: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/fedora-ocaml-3.10.1/ Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rjones at redhat.com Wed Feb 13 15:18:34 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:18:34 +0000 Subject: Fedora i386 rawhide rebuild in mock status 2008-02-09 In-Reply-To: <20080213151124.GA5878@humbolt.us.dell.com> References: <20080213151124.GA5878@humbolt.us.dell.com> Message-ID: <47B30A4A.5030804@redhat.com> Matt Domsch wrote: > ocaml-lablgl-1.02-15.fc8 (build/make) gemi > ocaml-ocamlnet-2.2.9-1.fc9 (build/make) rjones,gemi I fixed both of these bugs last night by coincidence when doing the 3.10.1 upgrade. They are both in F-9, or will be shortly. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rjones at redhat.com Thu Feb 14 15:03:48 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:03:48 +0000 Subject: Fedora i386 rawhide rebuild in mock status 2008-02-13 In-Reply-To: <20080214085946.A24710@humbolt.us.dell.com> References: <20080214085946.A24710@humbolt.us.dell.com> Message-ID: <47B45854.2080607@redhat.com> Matt Domsch wrote: > freetennis-0.4.8-6.fc7 (build/make) rjones [...] > ocaml-lablgl-1.02-15.fc8 (build/make) gemi > ocaml-ocamlnet-2.2.9-1.fc9 (build/make) rjones,gemi Gemi: All of these packages are fixed in Fedora CVS now, same goes for the apparent dependency problems from the Rawhide report yesterday. I'm just waiting for them to get pushed through the system. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rjones at redhat.com Sat Feb 16 20:05:08 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 20:05:08 +0000 Subject: Do we need an upgrade policy for OCaml packages in Fedora releases? Message-ID: <47B741F4.6090608@redhat.com> We've got requests such as this one (upgrade lablgtk to 2.10.0 in Fedora 8): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=424821 and a related one from Peter Lemenkov to support mldonkey. As I commented in that BZ, if we do that upgrade then at least 4 dependent packages need to be rebuilt as well. Furthermore anyone writing their own software on F8 which used any of these packages would need to at least recompile. On the other hand I took the opportunity this week to upgrade several packages in Rawhide (including lablgtk 2.10.0). That shouldn't be a problem because we expect Rawhide to break things. So I wonder if we need a policy that once a version of Fedora has been released, we don't upgrade packages on a whim, but only if there is a serious need (eg. security or some otherwise unresolvable bug). What do people think? I don't want to be too restrictive. If people don't mind recompiling that's another matter. Perhaps we should only have this policy for the base OCaml package and some other "vital" packages (eg. findlib) and leave the decision on a case-by-case basis for other packages? Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From lemenkov at gmail.com Sat Feb 16 20:20:14 2008 From: lemenkov at gmail.com (Peter Lemenkov) Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:20:14 +0300 Subject: Do we need an upgrade policy for OCaml packages in Fedora releases? In-Reply-To: <47B741F4.6090608@redhat.com> References: <47B741F4.6090608@redhat.com> Message-ID: 2008/2/16, Richard W.M. Jones : > We've got requests such as this one (upgrade lablgtk to 2.10.0 in Fedora 8): > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=424821 > and a related one from Peter Lemenkov to support mldonkey. MLDonkey is a killerapp for OCaml. I think satisfying its requirements must be high priority task. I don't see many problems in rebuilding few applications with latest ocaml libraries. Let's create exact list of obstacles which prevents from updating ocaml for mldonkey because all I've heard so far are speculative estimates "that something will be wrong", OK there is something wrong right now - the latest version (with a couple of critical bugs closed) most popular ocaml application, e.g. mldonkey can't be built with currently shipped ocaml libraries w/o breaking its requirements. -- With best regards! From rjones at redhat.com Sat Feb 16 21:09:30 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:09:30 +0000 Subject: mldonkey package for review Message-ID: <47B7510A.3040307@redhat.com> I've created a package & review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433143 I've only started it up (mlgui) and it looks OK to me, but can someone who actually uses this please test it. You'll need Rawhide to rebuild. The %doc section isn't quite right yet. rpmlint complains about the various encoding problems with files in doc. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3237 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From rjones at redhat.com Fri Feb 22 18:57:24 2008 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:57:24 +0000 Subject: ocamljava Message-ID: <20080222185724.GA27265@amd.home.annexia.org> ocamljava is an exciting looking project. It is a modification of the OCaml compiler so it targets Java bytecode. You can run unmodified OCaml programs on a JVM, call into Java libraries, call OCaml from Java and so on. It's fiendishly hard to build though, but after a few hours I have most of it compiled and a reasonable-looking srpm which only has a few rpmlint errors. I've opened a tracking bug for this if anyone else wants to have a go: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434560 Current spec file: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-ocamljava.spec Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 From dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Feb 29 16:10:26 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:10:26 -0500 Subject: OCaml/ppc64 Message-ID: <1204301427.18955.65.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Bored again, playing with OCaml/ppc64 for a bit of light relief. boot/ocamlrun ./ocamlopt -nostdlib unix.cmxa -g -I stdlib -I ../otherlibs/unix ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_executor.cmx ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_pack.cmx ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_unix_plugin.cmx ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild.cmx -o ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild.native /usr/bin/ld: ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_pack.o(.text+0x500c): unresolvable R_PPC64_REL24 relocation against symbol `ceil@@GLIBC_2.3' /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output How do I make it link against -lm? Why doesn't this bite elsewhere? -- dwmw2 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ocaml-3.10.1-ppc64.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 72310 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gemi at bluewin.ch Fri Feb 29 18:02:19 2008 From: gemi at bluewin.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard?= Milmeister) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 19:02:19 +0100 Subject: OCaml/ppc64 In-Reply-To: <1204301427.18955.65.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1204301427.18955.65.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1204308139.5507.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 11:10 -0500, David Woodhouse wrote: > Bored again, playing with OCaml/ppc64 for a bit of light relief. > > boot/ocamlrun ./ocamlopt -nostdlib unix.cmxa -g -I stdlib -I ../otherlibs/unix ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_executor.cmx ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_pack.cmx ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_unix_plugin.cmx ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild.cmx -o ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild.native > /usr/bin/ld: ocamlbuild/ocamlbuild_pack.o(.text+0x500c): unresolvable R_PPC64_REL24 relocation against symbol `ceil@@GLIBC_2.3' > /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output > > How do I make it link against -lm? Why doesn't this bite elsewhere? At least on i386 it is linked against -lm. It isn't visible from the build command.