Well, it seems that there will be a new upload anyway. I don't think that it will break binary compatibility, since i doubt any of our modules uses recursive module definitions yet.
----- Forwarded message from Xavier Leroy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivery-date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:10:27 +0200 X-Sieve: Server Sieve 2.2 From: Xavier Leroy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Caml-list] OCaml 3.07 patch 2 X-Spam: no; 0.00; 3.07:01 bug-fix:01 3.07:01 camlp:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 caml:01 ocaml-:01 ocaml-:01 distrib:01 emacs:01 patch:02 patch:02 binary:02 module:03 X-Antivirus: scanned by sophos at u-strasbg.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; 3.07:01 bug-fix:01 3.07:01 distrib:01 ocaml-:01 ocaml-:01 -patch:01 diffs:01 fixes:01 camlp:01 parsing:01 arguments:01 emacs:01 versions:01 xemacs:01 The second (and hopefully last) bug-fix patch against the OCaml 3.07 distribution is now available at http://caml.inria.fr/distrib/ocaml-3.07/ocaml-3.07-patch2.diffs This patch fixes the following issues: - Camlp4: parsing of labeled function arguments. - Emacs interface: portability issues between versions of GnuEmacs and XEmacs. - Incorrect code generated for certain recursive module definitions. - Name pollution issue on Mac OS X 10.3. (The last item is what makes the initial build go wrong under Mac OS X 10.3.) Feel free to send me feedback on this patch. Both negative ("it still doesn't work") and positive ("it fixed my problems") feedback are useful in deciding when to consider 3.07 as finished and to rebuild the binary distributions. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners ----- End forwarded message -----
