Gabor PALI writes:

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Ashish SHUKLA wrote:

...

GHC 6.12.2 is out[1]. What are the plans for it ? This release also contains shared-library patch for FreeBSD submitted by mux.

I am just building some vanilla binary packages for FreeBSD {7,8}.X for both i386 and amd64.

Bootstrap tarballs, you meant ? -- Ashish SHUKLA

Gabor PALI writes:

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Ashish SHUKLA wrote:

...

Bootstrap tarballs, you meant ?

No. Tarballs similar to Linux ones on the official home page. This way early adopters on FreeBSD can experiment with GHC 6.12.2 without requiring them to do the necessary compilation manually. Obviously this will not include dependency checking as it is not a fully-fledged port, but it can be used without special permissions.

Well, they're the bootstrap tarballs, which port downloads and installs temporarily in 'work' directory to bootstrap installation.

It is different from a bootstrap tarball since it will include profiled libraries, pre-built documentation etc, though it can be used as a bootstrap. I would be happy to see a lang/ghc-devel port featuring GHC 6.12, so it can be taken as a step towards that.

Yeah, me too...:) And what about schedule of IRC meetings ? Ashish -- They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin, Memoirs of the life and writings of Benjamin Franklin

Gabor PALI writes:

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Ashish SHUKLA wrote:

...

Well, they're the bootstrap tarballs, which port downloads and installs temporarily in 'work' directory to bootstrap installation.

I do not build them with the "ghc-$(ProjectVersion)-boot" (but "ghc-$(ProjectVersion)") directory similarly to the vanilla Linux binary packages, thus they can be hardly used for bootstrapping purposes in the classical way. Yesterday I repacked all the bootstrap we have for GHC 6.10.4 (to unbreak lang/ghc), and I got tarballs of ~38 MB each by omitting profiling libraries and documentation. I think they should remain compact as possible. It is easy for me to build separate bootstraps and vanillas, since I use almost the same environment for them. (I would like document the exact process on the GHC wiki soon.)

Yes, compact tarballs would be better. But we need documentation in those tarballs.

...

And what about schedule of IRC meetings ?

I am fine with them (every or every other Saturday, around 19:00 CEST,

CEST ? Can you mention the UTC offset instead ? Mine is UTC+0530.

#haskell-FreeBSD @ freenode), however this week I might not be able to make it.

No problems. -- Ashish SHUKLA

Gabor PALI writes:

...

Yes, compact tarballs would be better. But we need documentation in those tarballs.

Why?

Okay, if not in them then in separate. I think documentation is same everywhere so there is no point in re-generating them. This has been discussed already in a PR[1].

...

CEST ? Can you mention the UTC offset instead ? Mine is UTC+0530.

UTC+0200.

1900 UTC+0200 = 2230 UTC+0530 on Saturdays is fine for me. What about others ?

:g

References: [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/137057 -- Ashish SHUKLA

Gabor PALI writes:

Except when the user does not need documentation :) Anyway: the documentation will be part of the officially pre-built ghc.tbz still, and I simply did not want to force the users of the port to download a double-sized bootstrap since the port does not seem to be taking advantage of that at the moment.

Nice, just looked again at the port's Makefile and docs are generated at the port build time anyways so there is no need to package docs in bootstrap tarballs. -- Ashish SHUKLA