Re: [arch-haskell] [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

newer
Re: [arch-haskell] GHC 7.4.1 or HP...

Ethan Schoonover

17 Dec 2011 17 Dec '11

5:07 p.m.

There was a recent Arch-Haskell thread about dumping most of AUR Haskell packages: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/arch-haskell/2011-November/001744.html As an end user, I effectively ignore the official Arch Haskell packages as they are so far out of date. I'm also now trying to disregard most of the AUR since I came across that thread. Haskell is starting to feel fragile on Arch. What about moving *all* Haskell related packages to the Haskell Arch repo? All the Haskell Platform stuff, alex, happy, etc. Ethan Schoonover Github/Freenode: altercation - Solarized: http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 13:44, Ionut Biru wrote:

...

On 12/17/2011 11:41 PM, Bernardo Barros wrote:

...
Haskell platform was released with the latest stable GHC (7.0.4 of course).

Guys, what's happening with haskell support in Arch?

Xmonad, and now GHC and lots of packages in the supported repos are not keeping update with upstream.

i vote for dropping xmonad and all packages to aur and let the community handle them.

it seems we are not doing a great job at keeping them up to date.

-- Ionuț

Show replies by date

Peter Hercek

18 Dec 18 Dec

6:20 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On 12/17/2011 11:07 PM, Ethan Schoonover wrote:

...

As an end user, I effectively ignore the official Arch Haskell packages as they are so far out of date. I'm also now trying to disregard most of the AUR since I came across that thread. Haskell is starting to feel fragile on Arch.

What about moving *all* Haskell related packages to the Haskell Arch repo? All the Haskell Platform stuff, alex, happy, etc.

I'm actually in favour of this or a creation of haskell (or ghc-dependency) pacman group for anything which depends on ghc. This would allow me to postpone any ghc related update easily. That facilitates management of what haskell related package versions are installed on my machine. I'm often out of sync too. But I'm mostly behind :) Peter.

Fabio Riga

19 Dec 19 Dec

9:44 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/18 Peter Hercek

...

On 12/17/2011 11:07 PM, Ethan Schoonover wrote:

...
As an end user, I effectively ignore the official Arch Haskell packages as they are so far out of date. I'm also now trying to disregard most of the AUR since I came across that thread. Haskell is starting to feel fragile on Arch.

What about moving *all* Haskell related packages to the Haskell Arch repo? All the Haskell Platform stuff, alex, happy, etc.

I'm actually in favour of this or a creation of haskell (or ghc-dependency) pacman group for anything which depends on ghc. This would allow me to postpone any ghc related update easily. That facilitates management of what haskell related package versions are installed on my machine.

I'm often out of sync too. But I'm mostly behind :)

Haskell packages in Arch are out of date because the haskell repo depends on packages in extra and in community, and beacuse of Haskell Platform. I think that a six-month-cycle update is in contrast to Arch philosophy. We should steak with the latest in hackage and it should be quite easy if every package is in archhaskell repo. Fabio

Bernardo Barros

10:58 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Fabio Riga wrote:

...

Haskell packages in Arch are out of date because the haskell repo depends on packages in extra and in community, and beacuse of Haskell Platform. I think that a six-month-cycle update is in contrast to Arch philosophy. We should steak with the latest in hackage and it should be quite easy if every package is in archhaskell repo.

Arch is not a testing distro... And it's not even up to date with Haskell Platform. If you want to "go faster them haskell platform" you will need to work hard with packaging testing and this seems NOT the case with Arch at the moment...

Magnus Therning

20 Dec 20 Dec

2:48 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

Den 20 dec 2011 04:58 skrev "Bernardo Barros" :

...

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Fabio Riga wrote:

...
Haskell packages in Arch are out of date because the haskell repo

...

...
packages in extra and in community, and beacuse of Haskell Platform. I

depends on think

...

...
that a six-month-cycle update is in contrast to Arch philosophy. We should steak with the latest in hackage and it should be quite easy if every package is in archhaskell repo.

Arch is not a testing distro... And it's not even up to date with Haskell Platform. If you want to "go faster them haskell platform" you will need to work hard with packaging testing and this seems NOT the case with Arch at the moment...

I don't think it's quite that easy. AFAIU we'll soon have a choice to make, either stick to HP with an old version of GHC, or move to the latest stable GHC (7.4) and drop HP proper. Personally, I'm in favour of the latter. /M

Bernardo Barros

3:13 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

latest stable is 7.0.4

Fabio Riga

21 Dec 21 Dec

noon

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/20 Magnus Therning

...

Den 20 dec 2011 04:58 skrev "Bernardo Barros" :

...
Arch is not a testing distro... And it's not even up to date with Haskell Platform. If you want to "go faster them haskell platform" you will need to work hard with packaging testing and this seems NOT the case with Arch at the moment...

I don't think it's quite that easy. AFAIU we'll soon have a choice to make, either stick to HP with an old version of GHC, or move to the latest stable GHC (7.4) and drop HP proper.

Personally, I'm in favour of the latter.

/M

*From Arch Linux About page:* Arch strives to stay bleeding edge, and typically offers the latest stable versions of most software. [...] Arch Linux uses a "rolling release" system which allows one-time installation and perpetual software upgrades. ... and many other interesting feautres that made me love this distribution. Haskell Platform is not bleeding edge, it seems to follow a "old versions are more stable" approach, more in the way of Debian. This approach has is merits, but I prefer the "Arch way", so I vote for dropping HP. Actually Ghc is not the problem. Most packages in hackage are already builded with ghc-7.2, but 7.2 is testing, so we should use 7.04. The problem are the other packages: for example every update that depends upon * text* failed because in HP (until some days ago) the version was too old. In a couple of months this package will be too old again and will break other packages, unless we update haskell packages twice a year. IMHO, if cabal installs the latest available hackage, we sholud simply do the same. Fabio

Magnus Therning

1:29 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 06:00:02PM +0100, Fabio Riga wrote:

...

2011/12/20 Magnus Therning

...
Den 20 dec 2011 04:58 skrev "Bernardo Barros" :

...
Arch is not a testing distro... And it's not even up to date with Haskell Platform. If you want to "go faster them haskell platform" you will need to work hard with packaging testing and this seems NOT the case with Arch at the moment...

I don't think it's quite that easy. AFAIU we'll soon have a choice to make, either stick to HP with an old version of GHC, or move to the latest stable GHC (7.4) and drop HP proper.

Personally, I'm in favour of the latter.

/M

*From Arch Linux About page:* Arch strives to stay bleeding edge, and typically offers the latest stable versions of most software. [...] Arch Linux uses a "rolling release" system which allows one-time installation and perpetual software upgrades. ... and many other interesting feautres that made me love this distribution.

Haskell Platform is not bleeding edge, it seems to follow a "old versions are more stable" approach, more in the way of Debian. This approach has is merits, but I prefer the "Arch way", so I vote for dropping HP.

Actually Ghc is not the problem. Most packages in hackage are already builded with ghc-7.2, but 7.2 is testing, so we should use 7.04. The problem are the other packages: for example every update that depends upon * text* failed because in HP (until some days ago) the version was too old. In a couple of months this package will be too old again and will break other packages, unless we update haskell packages twice a year.

I think we all agree that GHC isn't the problem per se, it just created a very awkward situation when upstream decided that 7.2 (which based on the version number is stable) was a "tech preview". Lots of people just grabbed the latest release with a even version number and started using it. This is probably a good thing for upstream (lots of testing), but it isn't very good for packagers. It does mean that a lot of packages have recent releases that haven't been tested on 7.0, which does affect us. This situation is temporary though and I hope upstream realises what effects their decision had. I was in favour of switching to 7.2 despite it being a "tech preview".

...

IMHO, if cabal installs the latest available hackage, we sholud simply do the same.

As far as possible yes, there will always be dependencies that will make us lag at times, but without HP we won't have any upstream for libraries that are on a fixed release schedule. That will increase our chances of sticking close to the edge AFAICS. Dropping HP might have a big impact on [haskell] though. At the moment [extra]/[community] offers a stable base to build on, this will go away in the future. Every upgrade to [extra]/[community] has the potential to render [haskell] un-buildable. It will be interesting to see how well we can communicate to avoid that :-) It's still a net-win in my book though! /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then being a real problem in the longer term. -- Alan Kay

Bernardo Barros

23 Dec 23 Dec

3:30 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

Why can't we just update to ghc 7.0.4 for now? Nothing will break, look at the bugfixes: http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.0.4/html/users_guide/release-7-0-3.html BTW Fedora is doing a better job with Haskell then Arch now. they updated to 7.0.4 and are supporting a lot more packages. And now we are dropping packages. I think haskell packages are indeed a bit trickier then normal c/c++/python/etc libraries and packages, since their dependencies seems to be much stronger. And keep in mind "rolling release" does not mean "unstable" or "testing", it just means that we don't have releases but the system must always work and must be stable. "Bleeding edge" in an unfortunate expression. It we are going to be a "experimental" with 7.2.2 (which I think it's a mistake) we have to have a mechanism to ensure that at least a set of important packages used in production will never break, that there are quite a few of them.

Fabio Riga

7:29 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/23 Bernardo Barros

...

Why can't we just update to ghc 7.0.4 for now? Nothing will break, look at the bugfixes:

Actually *everything* will break: every time we update ghc, we need to recompile every package depending on it (i.e. every haskell package). No matter what version we upgrade to.

...

BTW Fedora is doing a better job with Haskell then Arch now. they updated to 7.0.4 and are supporting a lot more packages. And now we are dropping packages.

We are here to make Arch a better distro for Haskell.

...

I think haskell packages are indeed a bit trickier then normal c/c++/python/etc libraries and packages, since their dependencies seems to be much stronger. And keep in mind "rolling release" does not mean "unstable" or "testing", it just means that we don't have releases but the system must always work and must be stable.

... with the last stable version available.

...

It we are going to be a "experimental" with 7.2.2 (which I think it's a mistake) we have to have a mechanism to ensure that at least a set of important packages used in production will never break, that there are quite a few of them.

That's exactly what cblrepo is used for? Am I wrong? It seems to me that the meaning of "testing" in 7.2 branch is about "new features that could change in 7.4"; it's not about "breaking 7.0 branch". What works with 7.0.4 should works as well with 7.2 (and actually do!). Look at this: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.2.2/html/users_guide/release-7-2-1.html. I made a testing repo and updated to ghc-7.2.2 some 100 packages, and everything looks okay. For me it's the same, we can use both 7.2.2 or 7.0.4. During Christmas holiday I have enough time to try and build most of packages for one of those. If Magnus agree. Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo). Fabio

Mike Bonar

7:40 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On 12/23/2011 06:29 PM, Fabio Riga wrote:

...

2011/12/23 Bernardo Barros mailto:bernardobarros2@gmail.com>

Why can't we just update to ghc 7.0.4 for now? Nothing will break, look at the bugfixes:

Actually /everything/ will break: every time we update ghc, we need to recompile every package depending on it (i.e. every haskell package). No matter what version we upgrade to.

BTW Fedora is doing a better job with Haskell then Arch now. they updated to 7.0.4 and are supporting a lot more packages. And now we are dropping packages.

We are here to make Arch a better distro for Haskell.

I think haskell packages are indeed a bit trickier then normal c/c++/python/etc libraries and packages, since their dependencies seems to be much stronger. And keep in mind "rolling release" does not mean "unstable" or "testing", it just means that we don't have releases but the system must always work and must be stable.

... with the last stable version available.

It we are going to be a "experimental" with 7.2.2 (which I think it's a mistake) we have to have a mechanism to ensure that at least a set of important packages used in production will never break, that there are quite a few of them.

That's exactly what cblrepo is used for? Am I wrong?

It seems to me that the meaning of "testing" in 7.2 branch is about "new features that could change in 7.4"; it's not about "breaking 7.0 branch". What works with 7.0.4 should works as well with 7.2 (and actually do!).

Look at this: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.2.2/html/users_guide/release-7-2-1.html.

I made a testing repo and updated to ghc-7.2.2 some 100 packages, and everything looks okay. For me it's the same, we can use both 7.2.2 or 7.0.4. During Christmas holiday I have enough time to try and build most of packages for one of those. If Magnus agree.

Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

Fabio Well, if we want to get leksah working it requires haddock which now depends on 7.2. I'm not sure how many use leksah, but that's a vote in favor of 7.2.

Mike

Bernardo Barros

9:50 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mike Bonar wrote:

...

Well, if we want to get leksah working it requires haddock which now depends on 7.2. I'm not sure how many use leksah, but that's a vote in favor of 7.2.

We would need haddock 2.9.2 for ghc 7.0.4.

Bernardo Barros

9:54 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

...

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mike Bonar wrote:

...
Well, if we want to get leksah working it requires haddock which now depends on 7.2. I'm not sure how many use leksah, but that's a vote in favor of 7.2.

What version of leksah would require ghc 7.2.2? 10.0.4? As far as I can see here no stable version would.

Leif Warner

30 Dec 30 Dec

4:09 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

Leksah won't run on 7.2. Just install haddock (2.9.2) from [community], and that message about haddock requiring 7.2 goes away. On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Bernardo Barros wrote:

...

...
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mike Bonar wrote:

...
Well, if we want to get leksah working it requires haddock which now depends on 7.2. I'm not sure how many use leksah, but that's a vote in favor of 7.2.

What version of leksah would require ghc 7.2.2? 10.0.4? As far as I can see here no stable version would.

_______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell

Bernardo Barros

4:24 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

that's what I said

Fabio Riga

3 Jan 3 Jan

10:38 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

I'm going to test this in a few days... Fabio 2011/12/30 Leif Warner

...

Leksah won't run on 7.2. Just install haddock (2.9.2) from [community], and that message about haddock requiring 7.2 goes away.

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Bernardo Barros < bernardobarros2@gmail.com> wrote:

...
...
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mike Bonar wrote:

...
Well, if we want to get leksah working it requires haddock which now depends on 7.2. I'm not sure how many use leksah, but that's a vote in favor of 7.2.

What version of leksah would require ghc 7.2.2? 10.0.4? As far as I can see here no stable version would.

_______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell

_______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell

Peter Hercek

24 Dec 24 Dec

6:01 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On 12/24/2011 01:29 AM, Fabio Riga wrote:

...

I made a testing repo and updated to ghc-7.2.2 some 100 packages, and everything looks okay. For me it's the same, we can use both 7.2.2 or 7.0.4. During Christmas holiday I have enough time to try and build most of packages for one of those. If Magnus agree.

Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

I'm indifferent as for as the choice between 7.2.2. and 7.0.4. Though there is a question whether it makes sense, when 7.4.1 rc1 is out. Hopefully in few months there will be 7.4.1 and I would like to see that soon in archlinux (mostly to try DPH). I could try it in 7.2.2. but I do not know how much it changed to 7.4.1. and I can wait a bit to try something more stable. Peter.

Magnus Therning

25 Dec 25 Dec

2:50 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 01:29:12AM +0100, Fabio Riga wrote: [...]

...

I made a testing repo and updated to ghc-7.2.2 some 100 packages, and everything looks okay. For me it's the same, we can use both 7.2.2 or 7.0.4. During Christmas holiday I have enough time to try and build most of packages for one of those. If Magnus agree.

I don't think that [haskell] move to a version of GHC that is newer than what's in [extra]. This means that in order to avoid doing unnecessary work you need to ask Vesa what his GHC plans are. In a thread from earlier in the autumn he did express some plans, but I suspect you are already aware of that thread.

...

Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

I suspect the most worthwhile thing to do is an attempt to use 7.4rc1. /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. -- Alan Kay

Bernardo Barros

27 Dec 27 Dec

5:36 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Magnus Therning wrote:

...

...
Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

I suspect the most worthwhile thing to do is an attempt to use 7.4rc1.

It's a good idea too! I would suggest to have two repositories then. [haskell-stable] and [haskell-preview] Right now people are sending patches to package maintainers to get them working with 7.4. We can help with that process with the [haskell-preview] repository.

Magnus Therning

28 Dec 28 Dec

4:06 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 02:36:50PM -0800, Bernardo Barros wrote:

...

On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Magnus Therning wrote:

...
...
Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

I suspect the most worthwhile thing to do is an attempt to use 7.4rc1.

It's a good idea too! I would suggest to have two repositories then.

[haskell-stable] and [haskell-preview]

[haskell] and [haskell-testing] would make more sense :-)

...

Right now people are sending patches to package maintainers to get them working with 7.4.

We can help with that process with the [haskell-preview] repository.

I should point out that there is quite a bit of work involved if someone wants to forge ahead with this before the Arch maintainers get GHC 7.4 and packages built with it into [testing]/[community-testing]. /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. -- Alan Kay

Fabio Riga

7:28 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/28 Magnus Therning

...

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 02:36:50PM -0800, Bernardo Barros wrote:

...
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Magnus Therning wrote:

...
...
Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

I suspect the most worthwhile thing to do is an attempt to use 7.4rc1.

It's a good idea too! I would suggest to have two repositories then.

[haskell-stable] and [haskell-preview]

[haskell] and [haskell-testing] would make more sense :-)

...
Right now people are sending patches to package maintainers to get them working with 7.4.

We can help with that process with the [haskell-preview] repository.

I should point out that there is quite a bit of work involved if someone wants to forge ahead with this before the Arch maintainers get GHC 7.4 and packages built with it into [testing]/[community-testing].

As I mentioned before, I think there will be a lot of work including: building a 7.4 snapshot (not very stable...), patching *many* packages. I've already used 7.2.2 (from [testing]) for producing a [haskell-testing], so, if you don't mind, I could take charge and starting from here. At least we could have in few days an up-to-date repository. Then we should find a method to pass packages from [haskell-testing] to [haskell] and starting to use ghc 7.4 as soon as it will be available in [testing]. Fabio

Magnus Therning

29 Dec 29 Dec

2:20 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 01:28:12AM +0100, Fabio Riga wrote: [...]

...

As I mentioned before, I think there will be a lot of work including: building a 7.4 snapshot (not very stable...), patching *many* packages. I've already used 7.2.2 (from [testing]) for producing a [haskell-testing], so, if you don't mind, I could take charge and starting from here. At least we could have in few days an up-to-date repository.

Where do you keep your repo and how complete is it? /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Most software today is very much like an Egyptian pyramid with millions of bricks piled on top of each other, with no structural integrity, but just done by brute force and thousands of slaves. -- Alan Kay

Fabio Riga

8:07 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/29 Magnus Therning

...

Where do you keep your repo and how complete is it?

It's in my computer! Does your question imply that we can't use the same server as for [haskell]? At the moment I built 140 packages from [extra], [community] and [haskell]. Fabio

Magnus Therning

30 Dec 30 Dec

5:26 a.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 02:07:53AM +0100, Fabio Riga wrote:

...

2011/12/29 Magnus Therning

...
Where do you keep your repo and how complete is it?

It's in my computer! Does your question imply that we can't use the same server as for [haskell]?

My question only implies that I'd like to access your repo. I don't know your level of access to kiwilight (where [haskell] is kept) and if your repo had been public already then I could have put it on there myself.

...

At the moment I built 140 packages from [extra], [community] and [haskell].

Excellent. It's all based on 7.2.2, right? Just out of curiosity, are you using a modified cblrepo that outputs a dependency on the correct GHC version, or do you handle it through a PKGBUILD patch for each package? /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then being a real problem in the longer term. -- Alan Kay

Fabio Riga

1:15 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/30 Magnus Therning

...

My question only implies that I'd like to access your repo. I don't know your level of access to kiwilight (where [haskell] is kept) and if your repo had been public already then I could have put it on there myself.

I've no access to kiwilight. I can put packages on Dropbox, if you like.

...

...
At the moment I built 140 packages from [extra], [community] and [haskell].

Excellent. It's all based on 7.2.2, right?

Yeah.

...

Just out of curiosity, are you using a modified cblrepo that outputs a dependency on the correct GHC version, or do you handle it through a PKGBUILD patch for each package?

I modified cblrepo. Fabio

Magnus Therning

8 Jan 8 Jan

12:34 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 07:15:55PM +0100, Fabio Riga wrote:

...

2011/12/30 Magnus Therning

...
Just out of curiosity, are you using a modified cblrepo that outputs a dependency on the correct GHC version, or do you handle it through a PKGBUILD patch for each package?

I modified cblrepo.

I just pushed a branch for cblrepo that includes the required change to make PKGBUILDs that depend on GHC 7.2.2. Fabio, have you been building your packages in a fork of archhaskell/habs? Would you mind publishing it somewhere? (Preferably Github, but anywhere that's accessible would do.) /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then being a real problem in the longer term. -- Alan Kay

Fabio Riga

28 Dec 28 Dec

7 p.m.

New subject: [arch-general] Haskell Support Was: Xmonad version?

2011/12/25 Magnus Therning

...

I don't think that [haskell] move to a version of GHC that is newer than what's in [extra]. This means that in order to avoid doing unnecessary work you need to ask Vesa what his GHC plans are. In a thread from earlier in the autumn he did express some plans, but I suspect you are already aware of that thread.

I would like Vesa to take part to this discussion... In that thread he planned to drop haskell-platform (and I fully agree) but talked about moving those packages to [community]. IMHO the most useful thing to do is putting *all* haskell packages in [haskell], this is the easiest way to track dependencies with cblrepo.

...

...
Witch version should I use? For now we have 1 vote for 7.2.2 (Magnus) and 1 for 7.0.4 (Bernardo).

I suspect the most worthwhile thing to do is an attempt to use 7.4rc1.

I used 7.2.2 from [testing]. I suspect that a lot of package will not compile with 7.4...

...

/M

-- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: magnus@therning.org jabber: magnus@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus

I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. -- Alan Kay

_______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell

4881

Age (days ago)

4903

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

26 comments

7 participants

participants (7)

Bernardo Barros
Ethan Schoonover
Fabio Riga
Leif Warner
Magnus Therning
Mike Bonar
Peter Hercek