On Jun 15, 2007, at 1:26 , Ross Paterson wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 12:48:17AM +0200, Thomas Schilling wrote:
it's still a little work to do, but I think I'll be able to try and use Cabal configurations some time next week. Do you guys have any ideas what we could use as a good test case?
The goal is to find out how well the current scheme applies to actual use cases (and if there are serious performance problems to await).
As Simon mentioned, there's HGL depending on either unix or Win32.
The fps package was incorporated into base-2.0, so packages like binary, bzlib, zlib, darcs-graph or hmp3 could depend on base >= 2.0 or (base < 2.0 and fps).
The html package was split off from base-2.0. For this reason HAppS has two variants of its Cabal file, which could be combined under configurations. Similarly lambdaFeed could depend on base < 2.0 or (base >= 2.0 and html).
The above are all in HackageDB. The HEAD has a few more examples:
Several packages are split off from base (but its version number hasn't been incremented yet, so you can't use that).
The process package has a Setup.hs that exists only to drop the System.Process module for implementations other than GHC.
The time package has a Setup.hs that adds a dependency on Win32 if the platform is Windows.
The unix-compat package depends on the unix package when not compiled on Windows, using Setup.lhs and CPP hacks. More packages with the usual base/fps thing: cgi, fastcgi, tar, htar, hope. /Björn