On Tuesday, 19.05.2015 at 17:15, Peter Zotov wrote: > On 2015-05-19 16:58, Martin Lucina wrote: > >This begs the question, why did you use the approach of building the > >cross-compiler as a normal OPAM package, rather than as a compiler > >package? > > Because the cross-compiler needs a normal compiler (and its runtime) > to build and execute. Because many packages (from camlp4 to ppx) > depend on build-time components that execute on the host arch. > You also still have to add suffix to the version number, or else > there would be a conflict (I think).
Wouldn't the presence of an external (non-OPAM) compiler on the host be enough to execute the cross-compiler and build-time code from packages? That's more or less what your patches already do to bootstrap the compiler... Martin _______________________________________________ opam-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ocaml.org/listinfo/opam-devel
