Bug#582943: camlp5: FTBFS with OCaml 3.12: inconsistent assumptions over interface Warnings
Package: camlp5
Version: 5.14-1+3.12.0+dev23+10396+1
Severity: normal
User: debian-ocaml-maint@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ocaml312-ftbfs
Hello,
While rebuilding all packages with a SVN snapshot of OCaml (version
3.12.0+dev23, revision 10396), your package failed to build on amd64.
Relevant part:
> ocamlc -warn-error A -I ../main -I ../boot -I ../ocaml_stuff/3.12.0/utils -I ../ocaml_stuff/3.12.0/parsing -I ../ocaml_stuff/3.12.0/typing -I ../ocaml_stuff/3.12.0/toplevel -c -impl camlp5_top.ppo
> File "camlp5_top.ml", line 1, characters 0-1:
> Error: The files ../ocaml_stuff/3.12.0/parsing/parsetree.cmi
> and /usr/lib/ocaml/toploop.cmi make inconsistent assumptions
> over interface Warnings
> make[3]: *** [camlp5_top.cmo] Error 2
> make[3]: Leaving directory `/tmp/camlp5-5.14/top'
> make[2]: *** [out] Error 2
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/camlp5-5.14'
> make[1]: *** [world.opt] Error 2
The full build log is available at:
http://ocaml.debian.net/debian/ocaml3120dev23r10396/failures/camlp5_5.14-1%2B3.12.0%2Bdev23%2B10396%2B1_amd64.build
Copying warnings.mli from OCaml sources solves the problem. I guess we
should wait for a "more official" release of OCaml 3.12.0 before fixing
that.
Best regards,
--
Stéphane
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages camlp5 depends on:
ii libc6 2.10.2-6 Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib
ii ocaml-compiler-lib 3.12.0~0dev23+10396-1 OCaml interpreter and standard lib
ii ocaml-nox [ocaml-n 3.12.0~0dev23+10396-1 ML implementation with a class-bas
camlp5 recommends no packages.
Versions of packages camlp5 suggests:
ii ocaml-findlib 1.2.5+debian-1+b1 management tool for OCaml librarie
-- no debconf information
Reply to: