Re: [Haskell-cafe] Cabal failures...

Gregory Guthrie

20 Nov 2012 20 Nov '12

5:37 p.m.

No; the first sentence says that someone else had reported that testing on Windows was hard to do because of (a perceived) lack of access to Windows by Haskell developers... The implication is that Haskell developers (only/mainly) use *nix. I commented that if true this lack of Windows testing could limit the availability of Haskell to the largest market share of users. -------------------------------------------

...

Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Cabal failures... To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org

...

On 12-11-20 08:48 AM, Gregory Guthrie wrote:

...
It was also interesting to note a comment that most developers don't have access to a Windows machine for testing. With Windows at >90% of the computing market (Linux = 1.6%), this seems like a problem which might limit growth of Haskell usage. Just an observation. :-)

There is a paradox in that sentence.

The first sentence says, most developers don't have access to Windows machines for testing. But they have access to Linux machines. Then Windows machines must be a scarcity compared to Linux machines, no? So scarce, you even have difficulty borrowing or renting.

Then the next sentence says, the scarcity is the other way round, Linux machines are scarce, Windows machines are abundant. OK, so why is it so hard to access something abundant, and so easy to access something scarce? ------------------------------

Show replies by date

Albert Y. C. Lai

20 Nov 20 Nov

8:14 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

On 12-11-20 05:37 PM, Gregory Guthrie wrote:

...

No; the first sentence says that someone else had reported that testing on Windows was hard to do because of (a perceived) lack of access to Windows by Haskell developers... The implication is that Haskell developers (only/mainly) use *nix. I commented that if true this lack of Windows testing could limit the availability of Haskell to the largest market share of users.

Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS. Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do not want to. And why would they want to? Take webapp programmers for example. 99.999...% [1] of computers have sufficiently new web browsers. This market share is even higher than Windows. At the server side, the programmers have freedom in choosing the OS, and apparently, they choose anything but Windows, and this has never limited them in accessing >99.999...% of computer users. And this, 99.999...% web browser market share, is exactly driving Haskell growth. Not the petty >90% Windows slice. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...

Johan Tibell

8:20 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...

On 12-11-20 05:37 PM, Gregory Guthrie wrote:

...
No; the first sentence says that someone else had reported that testing on Windows was hard to do because of (a perceived) lack of access to Windows by Haskell developers... The implication is that Haskell developers (only/mainly) use *nix. I commented that if true this lack of Windows testing could limit the availability of Haskell to the largest market share of users.

Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS.

Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do not want to.

This logic is flawed. More than 90% of computers having Windows doesn't imply that 90% of all computers in a given household runs Windows. What's the probability that your household has a Windows computer if you're a programmer that don't live with your parents? What if that programmer is an open source contributor. Surely not 90%.

Darren Grant

8:28 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

Why not? Either way, I am chiming in as a programmer of many years. Unless using osx I stick with windows to avoid half-day forays into nettling technical issues that are not related to the work I am paid to perform. I would love for Haskell to work better there. On Nov 20, 2012 5:21 PM, "Johan Tibell" wrote:

...

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...
On 12-11-20 05:37 PM, Gregory Guthrie wrote:

...
No; the first sentence says that someone else had reported that testing on Windows was hard to do because of (a perceived) lack of access to Windows by Haskell developers... The implication is that Haskell developers (only/mainly) use *nix. I commented that if true this lack of Windows testing could limit the availability of Haskell to the largest market share of users.

Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS.

Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do not want to.

This logic is flawed. More than 90% of computers having Windows doesn't imply that 90% of all computers in a given household runs Windows. What's the probability that your household has a Windows computer if you're a programmer that don't live with your parents? What if that programmer is an open source contributor. Surely not 90%.

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Albert Y. C. Lai

8:34 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

On 12-11-20 08:20 PM, Johan Tibell wrote:

...

This logic is flawed. More than 90% of computers having Windows doesn't imply that 90% of all computers in a given household runs Windows. What's the probability that your household has a Windows computer if you're a programmer that don't live with your parents? What if that programmer is an open source contributor. Surely not 90%.

This counter-argument is flawed. Why limit oneself to one's own household? (Garage? Basement?) Get out more! Visit a friend. Talk to an internet cafe owner for a special deal to run one's own programs. Rent virtual machine time in the cloud. There are many creative, flexible, low-cost possibilities. If one wants to.

Johan Tibell

8:47 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...

This counter-argument is flawed. Why limit oneself to one's own household? (Garage? Basement?) Get out more! Visit a friend. Talk to an internet cafe owner for a special deal to run one's own programs. Rent virtual machine time in the cloud. There are many creative, flexible, low-cost possibilities.

If one wants to.

Clearly this different approaches have different costs. Fixing a bug from my couch or asking some stranger at a cafe if I can install msys is quite different things.

Erik de Castro Lopo

9:22 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...

This counter-argument is flawed. Why limit oneself to one's own household? (Garage? Basement?) Get out more! Visit a friend.

If that friend is not a coder, they are unlikely to have the dev tools installed.

...

Talk to an internet cafe owner for a special deal to run one's own programs.

Ditto.

...

Rent virtual machine time in the cloud.

I've already thrown a bunch of money at the microsoft machine for very poor results. If someone else set up and ran windows VMs and gave me access that would make testing on windows far more attractive. I just found that Amazon AWS has a free teir that includes windows as an option: https://aws.amazon.com/free/ Its still a huge sink of time and effort to set one up to a state where its ready to build haskell packages. Maybe if someone set up a github project that contained a script that could be downloaded onto a bare windows machine and then bootstrap that machine into a full haskell dev machine you might see some progress on this front. Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

Niklas Larsson

21 Nov 21 Nov

3:14 a.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

I just want to say that Windows support is much better than one could get the impression from this thread. I use Haskell on Windows as well as OSX and Linux. I think it works very well now, previously one had to know a bit of trickery to get things done. I don't think I have run into any more trouble on Windows than on the unixes, certainly there has been less headaches than with OSX (mostly GHC there), and you don't get the distro-hackage tension as on Linux. It is a bit annoying that packages depending on unix don't just quit upfront instead of installing a scad of dependencies first. But a mucked up package database that this thread is about can happen on any platform. The problem seems to be that cabal-install is so wonderfully easy to use that it obscures that there are no guarantees that things will just work and that it is often quite possible to fix it yourself by a tweak. If people think that what "cabal install" does behind the scenes is some advanced magic, it will not occur to them that they can do cabal unpack, fix the problem, and then cabal configure, cabal build and cabal install. Niklas 2012/11/21 Erik de Castro Lopo :

...

Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...
This counter-argument is flawed. Why limit oneself to one's own household? (Garage? Basement?) Get out more! Visit a friend.

If that friend is not a coder, they are unlikely to have the dev tools installed.

...
Talk to an internet cafe owner for a special deal to run one's own programs.

Ditto.

...
Rent virtual machine time in the cloud.

I've already thrown a bunch of money at the microsoft machine for very poor results. If someone else set up and ran windows VMs and gave me access that would make testing on windows far more attractive.

I just found that Amazon AWS has a free teir that includes windows as an option:

https://aws.amazon.com/free/

Its still a huge sink of time and effort to set one up to a state where its ready to build haskell packages. Maybe if someone set up a github project that contained a script that could be downloaded onto a bare windows machine and then bootstrap that machine into a full haskell dev machine you might see some progress on this front.

Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Mike Meyer

5:29 a.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...

...
This logic is flawed. More than 90% of computers having Windows doesn't imply that 90% of all computers in a given household runs Windows. What's the probability that your household has a Windows computer if you're a programmer that don't live with your parents? What if that programmer is an open source contributor. Surely not 90%. This counter-argument is flawed. Why limit oneself to one's own household? (Garage? Basement?) Get out more! Visit a friend. Talk to an internet cafe owner for a special deal to run one's own programs. Rent virtual machine time in the cloud. There are many creative, flexible, low-cost

On 12-11-20 08:20 PM, Johan Tibell wrote: possibilities.

The key word here is "low-cost". None of them are as low as the cost of Linux, Solaris, *BSD, etc. Those are all free. There's even free VM software available for them so you don't have to dedicate a machine to it. This actually makes the argument running in the other direction more telling. It's less expensive for Windows users to get Unix/Linux than Unix/Linux users to get Windows. If you want a Haskell environment to work in, install VirtualBoxOSE (free) and a Linux distro (also free) and work on that. Of course, the real cost is that maintaining software that you aren't using on a regular basis - which includes software you do use on a platform you don't - is a PITA. Given that, why would anyone doing something for free want to spend money for (access to a) copy of Windows to build/test software they aren't going to use?

Erik de Castro Lopo

20 Nov 20 Nov

9:05 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...

Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS.

Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do not want to.

I have been an open source contributor for over 15 years. All the general purpose machines in my house run Linux. My father's and my mother-in-law's computers also run Linux (easier for me to provide support). For testing software, I have a PowerPC machine and virtual machines running various versions of Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD. What I don't have is a windows machine. I have, at numerous times, spent considerable amounts of time (and even real money for licenses) setting up (or rather trying to) windows in a VM and it is *always* considerably more work to set up, maintain and fix when something goes wrong. Setting up development tools is also a huge pain in the ass. And sooner or later they fail in some way I can't fix and I have to start again. Often its not worth the effort. At my day job we have on-demand windows VMs, but I am not officially allowed (nor do I intend to start) to use those resources for my open source work. So is it difficult for an open source contributor to test on windows? Hell yes! You have no idea how hard windows is in comparison to say FreeBSD. Even Apple's OS X is easier than windows, because I have friends who can give me SSH access to their machines. Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

Clark Gaebel

9:21 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

+1 to this. The friction of finding, setting up, and using Windows isn't even comparable to just sshing into another unix box and testing something quickly. As a university student, I also find it relatively rare that I get to test on a Windows machine. My personal computer runs linux, my technical friends run linux or osx, and my non-technical ones run osx. Also, all the school servers that I have access to run either FreeBSD or Linux. If I want to run something on linux system, I have about 40 different computers that I can ssh into and run code on. If I want to run something on osx, I just have to call a friend and ask if they can turn on their computer and allow me to ssh in (to my own account, of course). If I want to run something on Windows, I have to track down a friend (in person!), ask to borrow their computer for a few hours, get administrator access to install the Haskell Platform, get frustrated that HP hasn't been upgraded to 7.6, and give up. It's just not practical, especially for the large amount of small (<500 LOC) packages on Hackage. - Clark On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

...

Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...
Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS.

Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do not want to.

I have been an open source contributor for over 15 years. All the general purpose machines in my house run Linux. My father's and my mother-in-law's computers also run Linux (easier for me to provide support). For testing software, I have a PowerPC machine and virtual machines running various versions of Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD.

What I don't have is a windows machine. I have, at numerous times, spent considerable amounts of time (and even real money for licenses) setting up (or rather trying to) windows in a VM and it is *always* considerably more work to set up, maintain and fix when something goes wrong. Setting up development tools is also a huge pain in the ass. And sooner or later they fail in some way I can't fix and I have to start again. Often its not worth the effort.

At my day job we have on-demand windows VMs, but I am not officially allowed (nor do I intend to start) to use those resources for my open source work.

So is it difficult for an open source contributor to test on windows? Hell yes! You have no idea how hard windows is in comparison to say FreeBSD. Even Apple's OS X is easier than windows, because I have friends who can give me SSH access to their machines.

Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Gershom Bazerman

9:55 p.m.

New subject: Windows Build Boxes (was Cabal failures...)

If some person or group of people is willing to administer and maintain windows build/testing boxes for the good of the Haskell community (perhaps even just for core infrastructure and an extended set of "blessed" libraries), I would be willing to contribute a decent sum to the procurement of these machines. I'm sure I am far from alone in this. It would be a very good use of our community resources to co-ordinate such efforts. Cheers, Gershom On 11/20/12 9:21 PM, Clark Gaebel wrote:

...

+1 to this. The friction of finding, setting up, and using Windows isn't even comparable to just sshing into another unix box and testing something quickly.

As a university student, I also find it relatively rare that I get to test on a Windows machine. My personal computer runs linux, my technical friends run linux or osx, and my non-technical ones run osx. Also, all the school servers that I have access to run either FreeBSD or Linux.

If I want to run something on linux system, I have about 40 different computers that I can ssh into and run code on.

If I want to run something on osx, I just have to call a friend and ask if they can turn on their computer and allow me to ssh in (to my own account, of course).

If I want to run something on Windows, I have to track down a friend (in person!), ask to borrow their computer for a few hours, get administrator access to install the Haskell Platform, get frustrated that HP hasn't been upgraded to 7.6, and give up.

It's just not practical, especially for the large amount of small (<500 LOC) packages on Hackage.

- Clark

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo mailto:mle+hs@mega-nerd.com> wrote:

Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

> Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to > find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer > is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the > programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, > can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS. > > Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do > not want to.

I have been an open source contributor for over 15 years. All the general purpose machines in my house run Linux. My father's and my mother-in-law's computers also run Linux (easier for me to provide support). For testing software, I have a PowerPC machine and virtual machines running various versions of Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD.

What I don't have is a windows machine. I have, at numerous times, spent considerable amounts of time (and even real money for licenses) setting up (or rather trying to) windows in a VM and it is *always* considerably more work to set up, maintain and fix when something goes wrong. Setting up development tools is also a huge pain in the ass. And sooner or later they fail in some way I can't fix and I have to start again. Often its not worth the effort.

At my day job we have on-demand windows VMs, but I am not officially allowed (nor do I intend to start) to use those resources for my open source work.

So is it difficult for an open source contributor to test on windows? Hell yes! You have no idea how hard windows is in comparison to say FreeBSD. Even Apple's OS X is easier than windows, because I have friends who can give me SSH access to their machines.

Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org mailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Richard O'Keefe

21 Nov 21 Nov

4:32 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

Let's put some numbers on this. (1) In this country, you can buy a second-hand dual core desktop for NZD 200 (roughly USD 165, EUR 130). You can buy a new laptop for NZD 400 (roughly USD 330, EUR 260). Not fancy machines, but more than adequate to compile and build stuff. Shipping adds a fair bit to prices here. So it _must_ be possible to buy a Windows box of some kind adequate for compiling, building, and testing open source software, for even less than that in North America or Europe. It's really *NOT* the price of the box-with-Windows-installed. (2) This department has a mix of Mac OS X, Linux (running on Apple dual-boot boxes), and Windows (running on Apple dual-boot boxes). The University has quite a few Windows labs. There would be _no_ students at this University who did not have ready access to a Windows machine whenever they wanted one. The servers in the department all run some flavour of UNIX, true. (3) Given an intel Solaris, intel Linux, or intel Mac OS X box, VirtualBox is free. You can run Windows in VirtualBox. Microsoft offer a full Windows 7 Professional licence to University students for USD 30. So I really don't buy the idea of a student finding it hard to get Windows. My University is part of the MSDN Academic Alliance, so staff get stuff for no money of their own. Windows 7 Home Premium is USD 200, Professional USD 300. Probably better to buy a cheap box that already has Windows. What about software? Well, Microsoft Visual Studio Professional 2012 is several times more expensive than the box it runs on, and Office is not cheap either. There are, as always, special deals, e.g., https://www.dreamspark.com/Product/Product.aspx?productid=34 seems to make VC++ 2008 available free to students, and the MSDN Academic Alliance makes this stuff easy for staff to get. For everyone else, Eclipse and NetBeans are free, and so are Cygwin and Mingw. It took me about a day to download and install a large amount of free software, giving me quite a decent environment. (Of course, if someone were paying me to do this, the University would charge NZD 150/hour, so "free" = NZD 1200 ...) I even had Microsoft SUA (Services for Unix Applications -- think of it as Cygwin from Microsoft but with a less horribly ugly terminal font). I had ghc and OCaml and SWI Prolog and Squeak and Dolphin Smalltalk and lots of good stuff. So it's not really the availability of software either. So am I a happy Windows hacker? Actually, no. I had a working tolerable setup under Windows Vista. Despite its bad press, I have to say I never had any trouble with Vista. Then my (the department's) Mac laptop needed something done to it -- I forget what -- and they said "while we're at it, it would simplify our lives if we upgraded the Windows side to Windows 7 like everyone else has now". I said, "OK, but I _really_ don't want to lose any of my programs." And they lost everything beginning with the letters M-Z, and what they didn't lose stopped working. Apparently when Windows went 64 bit they didn't leave \Program Files\ alone and add a \Program Files 64\ directory. Oh no! Now \Program Files\ was exclusively for 64-bit programs, and 32-bit ones were supposed to be in \Program Files (x86)\. You can guess what that did to the surviving remnants of my environment. How long did it take to rebuild my environment? I don't know. Except for installing Cygwin I haven't done it. The changes to the user interface -- apparently just for the sake of change, because absolutely nothing I do has become easier for me -- did nothing for my facility with the system, and having to spend half an hour installing updates every time I boot into Windows doesn't increase my enjoyment. I don't want to even _think_ about Windows 8. On 21/11/2012, at 3:21 PM, Clark Gaebel wrote:

...

+1 to this. The friction of finding, setting up, and using Windows isn't even comparable to just sshing into another unix box and testing something quickly.

As a university student, I also find it relatively rare that I get to test on a Windows machine. My personal computer runs linux, my technical friends run linux or osx, and my non-technical ones run osx. Also, all the school servers that I have access to run either FreeBSD or Linux.

If I want to run something on linux system, I have about 40 different computers that I can ssh into and run code on.

If I want to run something on osx, I just have to call a friend and ask if they can turn on their computer and allow me to ssh in (to my own account, of course).

If I want to run something on Windows, I have to track down a friend (in person!), ask to borrow their computer for a few hours, get administrator access to install the Haskell Platform, get frustrated that HP hasn't been upgraded to 7.6, and give up.

It's just not practical, especially for the large amount of small (<500 LOC) packages on Hackage.

- Clark

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: Albert Y. C. Lai wrote:

...
Clearly, since >90% of computers have Windows, it should be trivial to find one to test on, if a programmer wants to. Surely every programmer is surrounded by Windows-using family and friends? (Perhaps to the programmer's dismay, too, because the perpetual "I've got a virus again, can you help?" is so annoying?) We are not talking about BeOS.

Therefore, if programmers do not test on Windows, it is because they do not want to.

I have been an open source contributor for over 15 years. All the general purpose machines in my house run Linux. My father's and my mother-in-law's computers also run Linux (easier for me to provide support). For testing software, I have a PowerPC machine and virtual machines running various versions of Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD.

What I don't have is a windows machine. I have, at numerous times, spent considerable amounts of time (and even real money for licenses) setting up (or rather trying to) windows in a VM and it is *always* considerably more work to set up, maintain and fix when something goes wrong. Setting up development tools is also a huge pain in the ass. And sooner or later they fail in some way I can't fix and I have to start again. Often its not worth the effort.

At my day job we have on-demand windows VMs, but I am not officially allowed (nor do I intend to start) to use those resources for my open source work.

So is it difficult for an open source contributor to test on windows? Hell yes! You have no idea how hard windows is in comparison to say FreeBSD. Even Apple's OS X is easier than windows, because I have friends who can give me SSH access to their machines.

Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

kudah

23 Nov 23 Nov

3:53 a.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

Personally, I successfully use Wine to build, ship and test for Windows. There are some pitfalls related to -optl-mwindows and encodings, but, if you launch your program with $LANG set to proper windows encoding like cp1251 and the std handles closed with 0>&- 1>&- 2>&-, it should crash on related errors the same way as on windows. I am not (yet) aware of any Haskell programs that don't run under Wine. On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:05:45 +1100 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

...

So is it difficult for an open source contributor to test on windows? Hell yes! You have no idea how hard windows is in comparison to say FreeBSD. Even Apple's OS X is easier than windows, because I have friends who can give me SSH access to their machines.

Erik de Castro Lopo

9:46 p.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

kudah wrote:

...

Personally, I successfully use Wine to build, ship and test for Windows. There are some pitfalls related to -optl-mwindows and encodings, but, if you launch your program with $LANG set to proper windows encoding like cp1251 and the std handles closed with 0>&- 1>&- 2>&-, it should crash on related errors the same way as on windows.

I am not (yet) aware of any Haskell programs that don't run under Wine.

Thats a very interesting solution. I use Wine to run the test suite when I cross compile one of my C projects from Linux to Wine. Would you consider documenting the process of setting everything up to build Haskell programs under Wine on the Haskell Wiki? Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/

kudah

24 Nov 24 Nov

12:06 a.m.

New subject: Cabal failures...

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 13:46:37 +1100 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

...

kudah wrote:

...
Personally, I successfully use Wine to build, ship and test for Windows. There are some pitfalls related to -optl-mwindows and encodings, but, if you launch your program with $LANG set to proper windows encoding like cp1251 and the std handles closed with 0>&- 1>&- 2>&-, it should crash on related errors the same way as on 1>windows.

I am not (yet) aware of any Haskell programs that don't run under Wine.

Thats a very interesting solution. I use Wine to run the test suite when I cross compile one of my C projects from Linux to Wine.

Would you consider documenting the process of setting everything up to build Haskell programs under Wine on the Haskell Wiki?

Erik

Aside from what I posted above it's same as on Windows, just install Haskell Platform. There's already a page on Haskell Wiki http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/GHC_under_Wine though it seems very outdated. I can update it with my own observations when I get an HW account, they seem to have switched to manual registration while I wasn't looking.

4560

Age (days ago)

4564

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

15 comments

11 participants

participants (11)

Albert Y. C. Lai
Clark Gaebel
Darren Grant
Erik de Castro Lopo
Gershom Bazerman
Gregory Guthrie
Johan Tibell
kudah
Mike Meyer
Niklas Larsson
Richard O'Keefe