
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 07:42, Rémy Oudompheng
On 2010/11/1 Magnus Therning
wrote: It seems to me that Peter is leaning towards the same opinion as me, so unless you still have strong opinions to keep this list in 'archlinux' would you mind reverting the code to once again generate the full list of dependencies (i.e. make use of ghc's extended list of provides)?
You are very familiar with the code in 'archlinux' by now, so it'll probably be easiest for you to revert the change yourself. Is that all right with you, Remy?
I commented the relevant part of "ghc-provides.txt", reverting it back to its former state.
Cool! :-) /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus@therning.org Jabber: magnus@therning.org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe