Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35
> # via tagpending
> #
> # coq (8.2~beta4.svn20080907+dfsg-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
> #
> # * [d8e4082] Use debhelper 7, simplify debian/rules (Closes: #436684)
> package coq-libs c
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35
# via tagpending
#
# coq (8.2~beta4.svn20080907+dfsg-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
#
# * [d8e4082] Use debhelper 7, simplify debian/rules (Closes: #436684)
package coq-libs coqide coq
tags 436684 + pending
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 04:51:07PM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
>> This check is quite easy using the ocamlobjinfo tool: it prints "Force
>> custom: YES" when given a faulty .cma.
> ... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintia
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 11:17:51AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:51:20PM +0200, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> > The solution we discussed was to find a test that can tell us what
> > binaries are "ocamlc -custom" executable. If we can find them, we can
> > warn packager t
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 04:51:07PM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> This check is quite easy using the ocamlobjinfo tool: it prints "Force
> custom: YES" when given a faulty .cma.
... but I doubt that we can rely on external packages from lintian
checks (lintian maintainers: can we?). So I suggest
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> As such, we would like to add a lintian check to warn against OCaml
> custom mode executable. They can easily detected by looking for a magic
> number at the end of the file, as described in the forwarded mail from
> upstream.
Libraries can force custom mode executables
Package: lintian
Severity: wishlist
The OCaml compiler enables linking code in various ways: most notably
bytecode and nativecode. The bytecode executables though can be linked
together with the interpreter (the so called "custom mode"), generating
ELF executables which can not be stripped. Since
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 09:45:11 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> Julien Cristau [2008-09-07 0:48 +0200]:
> > I'm not sure this change is correct, for what it's worth. lintian is
> > buggy there, and the ocaml interpreter needs to be the same version as
> > the compiler used to build
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:51:20PM +0200, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> The solution we discussed was to find a test that can tell us what
> binaries are "ocamlc -custom" executable. If we can find them, we can
> warn packager that it should be rebuild without the deprecated option.
> To detect these fi
Hi Julien,
Julien Cristau [2008-09-07 0:48 +0200]:
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 09:21:20 +, Martin Pitt wrote:
>
> >* debian/control: Add dependency ocaml-base | ocaml, to provide a real
> > package alternative to ocaml-base-$ABI, and satisfy lintian.
>
> I'm not sure this change is c
10 matches
Mail list logo
