Ross Paterson wrote:
Can we do a release of Hugs over the next month or two?
I think that's a great idea. We've had a lot of big, useful changes since the last release (many thanks to you for doing them). I am completely swamped by a family crisis that's likely to leave me little spare time for at least a month though so I will struggle to contribute. Sorry. -- Alastair
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:36:48PM +0100, Alastair Reid wrote:
Ross Paterson wrote:
Can we do a release of Hugs over the next month or two?
I think that's a great idea. We've had a lot of big, useful changes since the last release (many thanks to you for doing them).
I think it's basically ready now, except that some of my changes may have caused minor breakage on Windows (which I'm unqualified to fix). Maybe we could put up a source tarball and invite Unix users to test it.
On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 10:34 AM, Ross Paterson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 01:36:48PM +0100, Alastair Reid wrote:
Ross Paterson wrote:
Can we do a release of Hugs over the next month or two?
I think that's a great idea. We've had a lot of big, useful changes since the last release (many thanks to you for doing them).
I think it's basically ready now, except that some of my changes may have caused minor breakage on Windows (which I'm unqualified to fix). Maybe we could put up a source tarball and invite Unix users to test it.
Is the build process documented somewhere? I casual glance about the source tree doesn't reveal anything up-to-date that includes everything you need to do (in particular, what the expected method of slurping in the libraries is). This used to be nicely automated via the Makefile at the top-level - has this been kept up-to-date? The last time I tried to use it, it failed, but the problem appeared to be MacOS-specific, so I don't know if it would go through on a regular linux box or not. --Jeff
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:09:12AM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
Is the build process documented somewhere? I casual glance about the source tree doesn't reveal anything up-to-date that includes everything you need to do (in particular, what the expected method of slurping in the libraries is).
There's some stuff at the bottom of the download page, though looking at it again, it could be improved. Basically cd hugs98/src/unix ./configure --with-fptools=<directory containing libraries and hslibs> cd .. make install If the hugs98 directory contains fptools (or a link to it) you can omit the argument to configure. The conversion doesn't change anything under the fptools directory, but it can be confused by some of the products of a GHC build (namely outputs of happy or hsc2hs), if they're lying about. You need the OpenGL development stuff installed for the OpenGL/GLUT packages to build (but it doesn't harm anything else if they don't).
This used to be nicely automated via the Makefile at the top-level - has this been kept up-to-date? The last time I tried to use it, it failed, but the problem appeared to be MacOS-specific, so I don't know if it would go through on a regular linux box or not.
I don't use it myself, but Sven has, and I think it's up to date.
On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 12:41 PM, Ross Paterson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:09:12AM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
Is the build process documented somewhere? I casual glance about the source tree doesn't reveal anything up-to-date that includes everything you need to do (in particular, what the expected method of slurping in the libraries is).
There's some stuff at the bottom of the download page, though looking at it again, it could be improved. Basically
cd hugs98/src/unix ./configure --with-fptools=<directory containing libraries and hslibs> cd .. make install
If the hugs98 directory contains fptools (or a link to it) you can omit the argument to configure. The conversion doesn't change anything under the fptools directory, but it can be confused by some of the products of a GHC build (namely outputs of happy or hsc2hs), if they're lying about.
I think that the `Install' file at top-level should be up-to-date before we release anything. In particular, it should address the fact that many people who might want to build hugs won't have fptools laying about, so instructions for how to fetch an appropriate fptools directory should be in there. The recipie that I use is to go into the hugs directory (top-level), and `checkout fpconfig', followed by `checkout libraries hslibs'. Is this all there is to it, or do I then have to go in and `make boot' or somesuch in the fptools dir? --Jeff
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:52:05PM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
I think that the `Install' file at top-level should be up-to-date before we release anything. In particular, it should address the fact that many people who might want to build hugs won't have fptools laying about, so instructions for how to fetch an appropriate fptools directory should be in there.
The source bundle (as built by the top-level Makefile), will include a directory fptools in the hugs98 directory, containing the necessary parts of hslibs and libraries. This is what we distributed last November, and seems reasonable to do again -- the libraries have to match the version of Hugs shipped. Once they've untarred that, it's exactly the short version in Install (or shorter).
The recipie that I use is to go into the hugs directory (top-level), and `checkout fpconfig', followed by `checkout libraries hslibs'. Is this all there is to it, or do I then have to go in and `make boot' or somesuch in the fptools dir?
That's all there is to it (no need to run anything inside fptools) -- you don't even need fpconfig. But those are the instructions for building from CVS, not from a source dist.
On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 02:28 PM, Ross Paterson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:52:05PM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
I think that the `Install' file at top-level should be up-to-date before we release anything. In particular, it should address the fact that many people who might want to build hugs won't have fptools laying about, so instructions for how to fetch an appropriate fptools directory should be in there.
The source bundle (as built by the top-level Makefile), will include a directory fptools in the hugs98 directory, containing the necessary parts of hslibs and libraries. This is what we distributed last November, and seems reasonable to do again -- the libraries have to match the version of Hugs shipped. Once they've untarred that, it's exactly the short version in Install (or shorter).
OK, good plan. We should lay down a tag in the libraries repo when hugs is released.
The recipie that I use is to go into the hugs directory (top-level), and `checkout fpconfig', followed by `checkout libraries hslibs'. Is this all there is to it, or do I then have to go in and `make boot' or somesuch in the fptools dir?
That's all there is to it (no need to run anything inside fptools) -- you don't even need fpconfig. But those are the instructions for building from CVS, not from a source dist.
The current RPM.mk file checks out a much more specific list of directories under libraries and hslibs. Is the list in RPM.mk up-to-date? Is don't see anything in the commit history suggesting recently revisions related to which library directories to check out. Also, the currently RPM.mk invokes autoconf, which chokes on configure.in under RH 7.2. Is there any reason to run autoconf anymore, since configure is in the repo? --Jeff
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 09:37:08AM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
The current RPM.mk file checks out a much more specific list of directories under libraries and hslibs. Is the list in RPM.mk up-to-date? Is don't see anything in the commit history suggesting recently revisions related to which library directories to check out.
The list is defined in Defs.mk, and I think it's up to date.
Also, the currently RPM.mk invokes autoconf, which chokes on configure.in under RH 7.2. Is there any reason to run autoconf anymore, since configure is in the repo?
Updating configure is tiresome -- someone might forget. What version of autoconf is it, and what goes wrong?
On Friday, August 8, 2003, at 10:14 AM, Ross Paterson wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 09:37:08AM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
The current RPM.mk file checks out a much more specific list of directories under libraries and hslibs. Is the list in RPM.mk up-to-date? Is don't see anything in the commit history suggesting recently revisions related to which library directories to check out.
The list is defined in Defs.mk, and I think it's up to date.
OK, great.
Also, the currently RPM.mk invokes autoconf, which chokes on configure.in under RH 7.2. Is there any reason to run autoconf anymore, since configure is in the repo?
Updating configure is tiresome -- someone might forget. What version of autoconf is it, and what goes wrong?
I get : autoconf: Undefined macros: configure.in:475: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-path-canonicalization], configure.in:480: AC_HELP_STRING([--with-preprocessor], configure.in:485: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-timer], configure.in:489: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-profiling], configure.in:494: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-stack-dumps], configure.in:499: AC_HELP_STRING([--with-nmake], configure.in:504: AC_HELP_STRING([--disable-large-banner], configure.in:509: AC_HELP_STRING([--with-gui], configure.in:513: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-internal-prims], configure.in:518: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-debug], configure.in:523: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-tag-checks], configure.in:528: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-lint], configure.in:532: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-only98], configure.in:537: AC_HELP_STRING([--with-pthreads], configure.in:542: AC_HELP_STRING([--with-fptools=<dir>], configure.in:547: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-ffi], configure.in:552: AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-hopengl], --Jeff
participants (4)
-
Alastair Reid -
Jeffrey R Lewis -
Ross Paterson -
Sven Panne