On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 10:18:25AM -0800, Don Stewart wrote:

Spotted that this morning. You're running the latest cabal on hackage?

Have to. People keep uploading packages that use the latest features. It's supposed to be safe for old packages unless they have non-trivial Setup scripts.

On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 18:16 +0000, Ross Paterson wrote:

On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 08:38:49AM -0800, Duncan Coutts wrote:

...

Mon Jan 21 08:34:11 PST 2008 Duncan Coutts * Deprecate defaultUserHooks, export autoconfUserHooks. Fix ticket #165 Setup scripts should switch to simpleUserHooks or autoconfUserHooks. autoconfUserHooks now fails if ./configure is not present. defaultUserHooks does the same thing it always did.

This means that a package with build-type: Configure but no configure script now fails configure (e.g. mersenne-random-pure64-0.1).

Hmm, "build-type: Configure" is relatively new, we can either live with the few failures that causes or switch "build-type: Configure" to use the old code (ie defaultUserHooks rather than autoconfUserHooks). It should be relatively easy to check how many packages this affects. In fact, let me do so... I downloaded a complete copy of the hackage arcive a couple days ago, so I've missed out mersenne-random-pure64. pkgs=$(grep -i 'build-type' hackage/*/*/*.cabal \ | grep Configure | cut -d '/' -f 1,2,3) There are 26 versions of 16 distinct packages that use build-type: Configure. for pkg in $pkgs; do tar -tzf $pkg/*.tar.gz | grep configure > /dev/null \ || echo "FAIL: $pkg" done Of those 5 have no configure file: directory-1.0.0.0 mersenne-random-0.1 old-time-1.0.0.0 process-1.0.0.0 Win32-2.1.0.0 So all the ones apart from mersenne-random are core packages. People tend not to build these since they're already installed. Incidentally the Win32 one is old (as is unix). So, what's the verdict? Take a hard line or not? Seems to me we could get away with it. Duncan