On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Thomas DuBuisson
- is there a "specification" of which are the "core" packages?
Are there packages on which the community standardizes? That's the goal of Haskell-Platform [1], but I don't place any special value in a package being in HP yet - I just work with whatever package on Hackage fills my need and am under the impression this is most peoples mode of operation.
From the FAQ linked by Paolo:
http://www.haskell.org/cabal/FAQ.html#dependencies-conflict "To avoid this problem in the future, avoid upgrading core packages. The latest version of cabal-install has disabled the upgrade command to make it a bit harder for people to break their systems in this way." I think that's what Paolo meant by "core" package. Sadly the FAQ doesn't say what core means. Nor is that page user editable. I think "core" here must refer to packages that ghc is linked to. For example, the process package in the example on the FAQ. I actually had this problem last weekend and I make a habit of never running 'cabal upgrade' and never installing things globally. Yet some how on my system a package that ghc was built with did get upgraded and installed in my user package db. It was causing various things to fail to configure. If I recall correctly it was the directory package, but I'll use FOO as a place holder. I used the suggested command line: ghc-pkg unregister --user FOO-X ghc-pkg said it was ignoring the command because it would break packages. So then I tried adding --force. At that point, ghc-pkg still said it was ignoring me and that I should use --force. This was on ghc-6.12.1. I tried it one more time with the --force option then ran ghc-pkg list FOO, and all instances of the FOO package were gone. At that point I could no longer configure any packages needing FOO. In the end I had to reinstall ghc so I took it as a chance to upgrade to 6.12.3. Jason