I run a source based linux distro called Heretix, and I want to make a ghc package which will install with or without an existing ghc. At the moment, we supply a binary-ghc package, whch is a prerequisite of the from-source ghc package. It seems to me that I can prepare HC tarballs for my target platforms (x86, x86_64) which will remove the need for the ghc-binary package. My questions: 1) Can I produce 'registered' hc files? The build manual bangs on about cross compiling unregistered hc files, which isn't really what I need. 2) Would a ghc built from registered hgc files every bit as good and complete as a normally bootstrapped ghc? If 1) and 2) then 3) Why don't you guys supply hc tarballs for bootstrapping on common platforms? They would seem to be rather more versatile than the usual rpms and binary tarballs. Thanks in advance! Andrew Walrond
On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 18:20 +0000, Andrew Walrond wrote:
I run a source based linux distro called Heretix, and I want to make a ghc package which will install with or without an existing ghc. At the moment, we supply a binary-ghc package, whch is a prerequisite of the from-source ghc package.
When we first added ghc to gentoo we considered doing an hc build but decided against it in the end. We now just do what you currently do, that is provide a binary package as a dependency of the source package. The ghc build system doesn't easily support hc builds and my impression is that it would take quite a bit of effort on the part of the ghc developers to improve the support for that kind of build. Given that it is quite a bit of work and there are simple workarounds (ie use a binary package) it has not been a high priority. Changing the build system tends to be the kind of task that can only be done by core developers and it is these developers whose time is most valuably spent on other tasks. So I think you're unlikely to get the changes you're looking for. My advice is to just stick to the binary bootstrap method. Duncan
duncan.coutts:
On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 18:20 +0000, Andrew Walrond wrote:
I run a source based linux distro called Heretix, and I want to make a ghc package which will install with or without an existing ghc. At the moment, we supply a binary-ghc package, whch is a prerequisite of the from-source ghc package.
When we first added ghc to gentoo we considered doing an hc build but decided against it in the end. We now just do what you currently do, that is provide a binary package as a dependency of the source package.
The ghc build system doesn't easily support hc builds and my impression
I wouldn't say that was true.
is that it would take quite a bit of effort on the part of the ghc developers to improve the support for that kind of build. Given that it is quite a bit of work and there are simple workarounds (ie use a binary package) it has not been a high priority.
No, .hc builds just work. They've been built nightly for amd64,x86 and sparc openbsd for a couple of years now.
Changing the build system tends to be the kind of task that can only be done by core developers and it is these developers whose time is most valuably spent on other tasks.
So I think you're unlikely to get the changes you're looking for. My advice is to just stick to the binary bootstrap method.
You won't have to hack the build system ;) -- Don
andrew:
I run a source based linux distro called Heretix, and I want to make a ghc package which will install with or without an existing ghc. At the moment, we supply a binary-ghc package, whch is a prerequisite of the from-source ghc package.
It seems to me that I can prepare HC tarballs for my target platforms (x86, x86_64) which will remove the need for the ghc-binary package. My questions:
1) Can I produce 'registered' hc files? The build manual bangs on about cross compiling unregistered hc files, which isn't really what I need.
2) Would a ghc built from registered hgc files every bit as good and complete as a normally bootstrapped ghc?
Yes, the OpenBSD versions of GHC build from registerised .hc tar balls. It's fast. If you're interested in this path, check out: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/lang/ghc/
If 1) and 2) then
3) Why don't you guys supply hc tarballs for bootstrapping on common platforms? They would seem to be rather more versatile than the usual rpms and binary tarballs.
Most distros are using binary bootstrapping. I think OpenBSD is the only one building from .hc src. -- Don
On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 09:47 +1100, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
Most distros are using binary bootstrapping. I think OpenBSD is the only one building from .hc src.
That's because none of the rest of us had heard that it'd been fixed! I'm glad to hear it, we might switch. Gentoo users ought to be used to how long it takes to build packages from source but they still complain to us about how long it takes for ghc to build. (Partly that's down to the fact that building all the bundled libs takes a while) Duncan
participants (4)
-
Andrew Walrond -
dons＠cse.unsw.edu.au -
Duncan Coutts -
Lennart Augustsson