On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 08:55:28AM +0100, Sven Panne wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 7. Dezember 2006 11:37 schrieb Christian Maeder:
The archive http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/6.6/ghc-6.6-src-extralibs.tar.bz2 does not contain the files ControlPoint.hs and Domain.hs from directory libraries/OpenGL/Graphics/Rendering/OpenGL/GL/
If I see things correctly, the 6.6 extralibs contain the version 2.1 of the OpenGL package, i.e. the stuff currently in http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/unstable/OpenGL/, at least I hope so. :-/
These files are listed by the binary distribution http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/6.6/ghc-6.6-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2
This will probably have been made with whatever OpenGL was in darcs when the build was done (the binary distributions come from the nightly builds). The extralibs are not part of the GHC release, they are just sometimes bundled to make users' lives easier, so the GHC release is not tied to any particular version of the extralibs.
To be honest, I don't fully understand the workflow for building the "official" GHC distributions currently. In former times, the whole tree, including libraries, had a CVS tag, so things were crystal-clear.
GHC and the core libraries all have a "6.6 release" tag. One problem we do have is that if you get a library (core, extralibs or otherwise) from darcs on two different days then you might get two different libraries with the same version number. We should possibly do something like having only odd second components (e.g. version 2.3 but not version 2.4) in darcs repos so we can at least spot these unstable version numbers. Then to do a release you'd push the three patches Version=2.4; tag 2.4; Version=2.5 all at once. Thanks Ian