Re: package mounting

On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 09:39:50AM +0100, Ketil Malde wrote:

Frederik Eaton writes:

...

...

It looks nice, but don't you think the -package-base flag ought to take both the package name *and* the mountpoint?

...

My intention was that -package-base specifies a base for the package specified in the preceding -package flag [...] In other words, it is an optional argument and the syntax is

...

ghc ... -package PACKAGE -package-base BASE ...

How about something like

ghc ... -package PACKAGE@BASE

(where the @BASE part is optional)?

I don't know. Do we want to prevent packages from ever having '@' in their name? Your suggestion seems reasonable, I just thought that my version would be easier. Also, there's no reason why we couldn't start with my '-package-base' option syntax and then add your '-package PACKAGE@BASE' syntax later if it still seems like a good idea... so maybe we should just postpone the decision. Cheers, Frederik -- http://ofb.net/~frederik/