On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 12:48 +0100, Ross Paterson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:17:43PM +0200, Thomas Schilling wrote:
I presume the final interface should be to give the user a simple way to query the dependenies by giving assignments for OS, arch, implementation, etc. and then dynamically (yes, using JavaScript) updating the dependency list. It shouldn't be hard to generate the necessary code from the Cabal file. I think the current way is okay for now, though.
The pages are CGI output, so those could be extra parameters.
The main problem with using this representation is, that it assumes that flags are only used to let Cabal decide dependencies based on present dependencies. This is exactly the part I would *not* want to use them for -- they are meant to be used to enable/disable certain features like, e.g., using GTK or WXWindows or building with debugging support.
I don't quite follow you, but it treats optional features (if's without else's) as not creating dependencies.
The point is, that flags like "old-base" or "bytestring-in-base" (as, for example, in [1]) are used solely to dispatch on the version of the base package. It should not be necessary for the user to invent flag names for such uses.
Duncan is currently implementing his proposal to use the 'package(...)' predicate to enable specifying different dependencies depending on the version of some package.
Is that written up somewhere?
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/cabal-devel/2007-October/001189.html / Thomas [1] .. http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/cabal-install/0.4.0/cabal-instal...