opam packages #71
opam packages #71
Conversation
|
We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement https://github.com/cryspen/hacl/blob/main/CLA.md ensuring that the contribution can be licensed under Apache 2.0 and MIT. In order for us to review and merge your code, please mention @cryspen/core in a comment below to get yourself added. |
|
We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement https://github.com/cryspen/hacl/blob/main/CLA.md ensuring that the contribution can be licensed under Apache 2.0 and MIT. In order for us to review and merge your code, please mention @cryspen/core in a comment below to get yourself added. |
|
@victor-dumitrescu I added you to the CLA, I presume that's ok. |
|
@victor-dumitrescu let me know how you want to proceed with this |
|
@cla-bot check |
|
The cla-bot has been summoned, and re-checked this pull request! |
- config.h needs to be in path. It is in build/ - The Makefile needs to know the platform/toolchain capabilities in order to blocklist unsupported files. This is generated by cmake. I had to adapt it a little to make it work in this setup.
franziskuskiefer
force-pushed
the
franziskus/vdum_opam_pacakges
branch
from
21a228f
to
e34c221
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The opam.sh script produces packages that are installable via opam, with the C code being built with the new build system, so it would be good to merge this and have it in CI. We can iron out any issues that come up along the way separately before we publish to opam. Thanks!
Packaging for opam.
@victor-dumitrescu Let's clean this up and get it in. Is there anything you think we should change here?