[MLton] release

[Matthew Fluet]

Ville:
Thanks for the x86-linux, glibc 2.13.  I rename the file on the Download 
page, just to keep the convention of the different darwin packages.
BTW, does this x86-linux correspond some well-known distribution?  It 
would be good to mark it as such on the Release20070826 page, since the 
glibc 2.3 version should be used by most current Linux distributions.

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Matthew Fluet wrote:
> Ville:
> A big thanks for building binary packages for hppa-hpux, powerpc-aix, 
> sparc-solaris, and x86-mingw.  We really appreciate it!
>
> Adam:
>> From http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=2541, I see 
> the Fedora8 rpms are being built.  My guess is that the GCC internal compiler 
> error is the same one that I reported earlier, just on the PPC architecture:
>   http://mlton.org/pipermail/mlton/2007-July/029900.html
>   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=247407
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32694
> What is interesting from the failed build log on PPC is that it occured when 
> gcc compiles code generated by mlton-20061107.  My guess is that mlton 
> 20061107 is currently unusable on PPC Fedora 6,7,8 (anywhere where the 
> default gcc is 4.1.2-N for N >= 13), since such an arch doesn't have a native 
> codegen to work around the buggy gcc.  I think you would find that you can't 
> rebuild mlton 20061107 on those distributions either.
>
> The changelog for gcc-4.1.2-19 (a Fedora7 update candidate) doesn't mention 
> fixing the PRs above, so I presume it is still a bug there.
>
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2007, Matthew Fluet wrote:
>>  I've tagged 'mlton-20070826', updated the wiki, put up the .tgz source
>>  package, and put up amd64-linux and x86-darwin binary packages. Feel free
>>  to build additional binary packages.  Sometime later this week I'll do a
>>  more public announcement on mlton-user, comp.lang.{ml,functional}, etc.
>>
>>  On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Matthew Fluet wrote:
>> >   I'm planning on tagging a release over the weekend, since it has been
>> >   nearly a week with no reports of any problems with the release 
>> >   candidates.
>> >   I'm going to be updating
>> >   http://www.mlton.org/ReleaseChecklist
>> >   things will be a little different this time around, since binary 
>> >   packages
>> >   will be coming from a number of different developers.  Primarily, we'll 
>> >   be
>> >   tagging before packaging, posting the source release, and asking binary
>> >   builders to build from the source release.
>> > 
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  MLton mailing list
>>  MLton at mlton.org
>>  http://mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton
>> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLton mailing list
> MLton at mlton.org
> http://mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton
>