David Allsopp

Can I double-check which version of opam you're using? Also, what's the output - before sourcing `env_hook.fish` of `opam env` itself?

Even at a small size, I find it a bit odd that we unconditionally add this to all bytecode executables, given that it’s not of any use to them (and...

Compiling with `-g`, the executable contains information which is of use to the executable (and consequently the user) - the `HINT` information is still not of any use, even then!

Yes indeed, to both

Doesn't master now become 2.3.0~dev?

I've pushed two additional commits which will hopefully improve the CI. As it's written at the moment, the 4.14.1 and 5.3.0 packages don't support bytecode-only builds (I'm not sure if...

The lint error is incorrect (as for compiler packages in general). The failures on Arch I think can be ignored, although there's trouble on the horizon! I think that's GCC...

No, I’d suggesting ignoring those errors - the existing 4.14.1 is already not working on Arch, so nothing here I think makes it worse. Not sure about constraining it away...

This now duplicates https://github.com/ocaml/opam-repository/issues/25819#issuecomment-2618893387 and is fixed by https://github.com/dra27/opam-repository/pull/22.

> Not sure exactly who's responsible for opam compiler packages so I tentatively cc @Octachron and @dra27. Suggests that I really should move on getting the precise value in https://github.com/dra27/opam-repository/commit/7813e70e155ac3a9c11927ab40b620d7741117d4...