From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4PiPKO4spGC4AgEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 23:09:02 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id 0EFCJO4spGDVXAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 21:09:02 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 563A81AC28 for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 23:09:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:36166 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lj6xZ-0007bg-9U for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 18 May 2021 17:09:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53868) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lj6nu-00023w-CL for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:59:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45909) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lj6nu-0001zA-56 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:59:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lj6nu-0003IT-4P for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:59:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#47768] ocaml - how can we get more recent version of core-kernel and common ppx'es Resent-From: "erikl@posteo.net" Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 20:59:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 47768 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: pukkamustard Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, 47768@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 47768-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47768.162137152912651 (code B ref 47768); Tue, 18 May 2021 20:59:02 +0000 Received: (at 47768) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 May 2021 20:58:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57455 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lj6ng-0003Hz-NU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:58:49 -0400 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:38607) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lj6ne-0003Hm-OQ for 47768@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:58:48 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A777240027 for <47768@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 18 May 2021 22:58:39 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1621371520; bh=oZNCX0daVcUejjX0nOAM5pnAXMf4eEkRvCbukbqx1yA=; h=From:Subject:Date:Cc:To:From; b=bW97tIC1/q3ChLu8SgKP2n4bCQBBTY3ltWdEWdGNRSLpidG26rRGrxjTdJxFKHyj7 wwc9xmbHjKd1+iw91D7guGNtNq/gN18wwgYHx9N3b3PmZVLLSQzGD1hq/Bv/wpiet+ HdOoizyzqQ8FYpen3iyDBEUIS03oS50tb+Wrl0D9vEsKX1l/W3iODZlJE/SCDX7YLa LbP8gB8WHas7dePKTfm+pFXqKjm+SI0j6Qv2hJqNq/T1aLfbuasdexSQ64GzEeqrvj D45zIb+mDw1TxKunkFz02jbFBZJ6hy8H9ZdHkLifQg3HJ6TbwuelK7LLeD4xNSBdMP vciBeleBUL8eg== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Fl7dV3z5Sz9rxM; Tue, 18 May 2021 22:58:38 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "erikl@posteo.net" Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 20:58:37 +0000 Message-Id: References: <86h7iz7p6f.fsf@posteo.net> In-Reply-To: <86h7iz7p6f.fsf@posteo.net> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 18 May 2021 17:08:54 -0400 X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1621372142; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=oZNCX0daVcUejjX0nOAM5pnAXMf4eEkRvCbukbqx1yA=; b=rpdoXoHWMQWJkiqLsDyYYC7laVksiBhN4FP1D6R11mhggYO9fDfM48TbumC2lS6BORmm0m SwQg9mxzPO9798WCWGa1tj/zru4f1xoZtGiYnBQL7/MsUHvWn0V6lRP5vxNnK2cqMswOwg 1yzgGBnrHgKV58gbD5vPc6sn12PRVoZysFDAeoJXWwDhqDL920TstE+CIbiG5lKLNQp6M9 VuvkEgho3i3HpLTLIJp1mjEqLJc2mztqK6ZegYa3oqDqmGjJGMR++XYizXhPNl6+6/wqoq pINDfckzHcIPvDQGf4SlYHaSr63mkfljdjKdXS/Av1K35vFKD3LiSDjQLQPisw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1621372142; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=slR1rSzWApKgSYwmHx47HoD35NgPKZiwwO3j3Z0dCei/JxrIo91La3LL7ZutVF/Hr7+6Ci SWZZH8N443tT3ayUnZhY/ZQA1fiigdzxxwmzR+5otwbsjFBoU4vRLL/kbxJezNPl0amTRv LOvgJi9Mfr0A+ltNpzGe0j6Kuch/mRAYTbFJ5+qQRgz/0ro1qhWZDoWgAZEEOwC7gzNxIr O6VPjq+28syo0plE2PZymJKLuPZfy/lWJWxFinEICWZiV5WJQ1beVNs07KpvO3v33cHvHs Gp0ggWIRGxpfpAMFB4Jzl09sIxjQnz6O7anDcg6Tlsv+PagNBCD/aFmMA7yQzQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=bW97tIC1; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 0.16 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b=bW97tIC1; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (strict)" header.from=posteo.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 563A81AC28 X-Spam-Score: 0.16 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: FPBeMvJOeXq0 Great, this is exactly what I was hoping to find! I had of course forgotten t= o search the debbugs and in the devel mailing list there were only really ol= d threads about the 4.07 stuff.=20 Thanks for your work here, I will test your patches and let you know :) Sent from my iPhone > On 18 May 2021, at 22:38, pukkamustard wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFHi Erik, >=20 > There has been some work towards updating the OCaml packages in Guix (see h= ttps://issues.guix.gnu.org/47768). >=20 > A lot of packages have been updated so that there is a now an updated ocam= l-X package for a previously existing ocaml4.07-X package. This includes a l= ot of ppx'es. However not everything has been updated yet and there are stil= l a few packages missing to be able to update ocaml-core-kernel. But maybe y= ou could use the #47768 as a basis and update some packages towards ocaml-co= re-kernel? >=20 > Help is also required in reviewing the patches. The series has become quit= e large and hard to review (42 patches). If you could try them out that woul= d be great. >=20 > -pukkamustard >=20 >=20 > Erik writes: >=20 >> Hi, I have a project that requires a more recent core-kernel and some of t= he >> ppx'es (such as ppx_fields_conv). >>=20 >> Being very new to guix I've managed to add/update packages for python and= ruby >> stuff, but this ocaml.scm file is quite different. There's a lot going on= which >> I'm guessing is related to complexities arising from the whole ppx transi= tion >> that happened in the ocaml ecosystem a few years ago, or perhaps just to t= he >> somewhat unsynchronized way libraries move to new versions of the compile= r and >> libs (just speculating here). >>=20 >> Anyway afaict (with my limited guix-fu) I would either need to duplicate a= whole >> lot of packages or somehow reorganize things to share definitions where i= t makes >> sense. Both those options would require some coordination with the people= who >> made the ocaml.scm infrastructure first, because clearly there are projec= ts out >> there that need the current set of packages to work like they do now and I= don't >> want to just post a huge patch that surprises these people. >>=20 >> Can we get a thread going somewhere on adding a recent version of >> ocaml-core-kernel (for the 4.11.1 ocaml package, possibly bumping that to= 4.11.2 in the process)? >>=20 >> Best regards, >> Erik Lovlie >=20