On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:23:16AM -0600, Jerry James wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > For provenpackagers who want to pitch in with OCaml builds, here's a
> > summary of what I'm doing:
>
> While looking through the packages still needing a rebuild, I have
> noticed all 3 of the following:
> - ExclusiveArch: %{ocaml_arches}
> - ExcludeArch: sparc64 s390 s390x
> - No ExcludeArch or ExclusiveArch at all
>
> Only the first is correct, right? We ought to try to be consistent about this.
It's a good question. I've not been touching any of these lines.
%{ocaml_arches} is defined as part of RPM (/etc/rpm/macros.ocaml-srpm).
But it's not accurate and I don't know who put it in RPM.
There's no reason why OCaml shouldn't be compiled on any architecture
that has a C compiler. On a tiny minority you'd only be able to use
the slower bytecode implementation, but the only arches I'm aware this
is the case are s390{,x} & aarch64. On all the others there is some
native code compiler, even if it's not upstream (like ppc64).
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
