
Hi devs, I've just hit on a strange bug, and I don't know where to start looking. In my branch where I'm building support for dependent types (github.com/goldfirere/ghc.git; branch: nokinds.... but you don't need to look there) I'm going through the testsuite and picking off bugs one at a time. I'm very puzzled by the output I'm getting from typecheck/should_compile/tc231, which does a -ddump-tc. At the end, I see ... Dependent modules: [] Dependent packages: [base-4.8.0.0, ghc-prim-0.3.1.0, integer-gmp-1.0.0.0] Notice the version number of integer-gmp. I haven't touched anything near there! And, my integer-gmp.cabal file says 0.5.1.0, which is what I'd expect. Sure enough, when I use the inplace `ghc-pkg list`, I see that I have integer-gmp-1.0.0.0 installed, along with all the other boot packages with their correct version numbers. Any hints here? I can surely work around this, but it's very strange! Thanks! Richard

That's the version number of /libraries/integer-gmp2, which is
installed by default now instead of the old integer-gmp package (it
still uses the integer-gmp package name).
luite
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Richard Eisenberg
Hi devs,
I've just hit on a strange bug, and I don't know where to start looking.
In my branch where I'm building support for dependent types (github.com/goldfirere/ghc.git; branch: nokinds.... but you don't need to look there) I'm going through the testsuite and picking off bugs one at a time. I'm very puzzled by the output I'm getting from typecheck/should_compile/tc231, which does a -ddump-tc. At the end, I see
... Dependent modules: [] Dependent packages: [base-4.8.0.0, ghc-prim-0.3.1.0, integer-gmp-1.0.0.0]
Notice the version number of integer-gmp. I haven't touched anything near there! And, my integer-gmp.cabal file says 0.5.1.0, which is what I'd expect. Sure enough, when I use the inplace `ghc-pkg list`, I see that I have integer-gmp-1.0.0.0 installed, along with all the other boot packages with their correct version numbers.
Any hints here? I can surely work around this, but it's very strange!
Thanks! Richard
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
participants (2)
-
Luite Stegeman
-
Richard Eisenberg