Ocamlbuild.0.10.1 - #8156
Conversation
✅ All lint checks passed 71f92ad
✅ Installability check (5893 → 5893)
|
|
Does it fix: |
|
I have reverted 0.10.0 as it seems to break some existing packages. Was it expected? |
|
Nope, breaking builds is never expected. Although it is not completely surprising either as 0.10 indeed changes the way Thanks for reverting. I'll investigate locally with the repro-case and see what we should do. "Jamais deux sans trois"... |
|
I'll close the PR for now while I don't understand the regression better. |
the 0.10 had unexpected breakcakge of backwards compatibility: ocaml/opam-repository#8156 (comment)
|
@gasche Can we please get a version with the -toolchain option? This holds up many downstream cross-compilation improvements. |
|
I'll try to do this before the end of the month, yes. This release is painful because of the |
Actually, I don't think so. I believe the root cause of the regression is ocamlbuild not passing the necessary -I flags when building a cmxs, most likely caused by ocaml/ocamlbuild@89888f2c40. |
|
This commit is part of the |
|
@gasche Actually, it's weirder. I bisected the change to ocaml/ocamlbuild@f865497a8. It looks like -linkall wasn't passed before but it is passed now, which causes the immediate failure. Also, you've added the tag "foo" in ocaml_specific.ml... |
|
@gasche I think I know what happens. Specifically, you're now linking a cmxa and a into a cmxs, instead of cmx and o. However, cmxa already has an autolink directive, so instead of the a, what's really needed is a -I flag. |
|
I think that the discussion in ocaml/ocamlbuild#131 would give more context. |
|
@gasche At a glance that was just a mixture of more confusion and everything I already knew. Anyway, I already implemented a fix, PR incoming. |
|
@gasche Please review ocaml/ocamlbuild#159. |
Followup on #8155... The joy of software development :-)