Re: New Package Developer
On Monday 29 April 2002 02:47 am, Michael Weber wrote:
> * "Shawn P. Garbett" <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2002-04-25T13:58-0500]:
> > Secondly, The package is an extension to ghc (haskell compiler). It has
> > scripts and library files. I've run into the problem in the make file of
> > it refering to things like '/usr/lib/ghc-5.02.2/'.
> Asking the maintainer of ghc* was not an option? :)
Oh that would be far to reasonable for my twisted brain... ;-)
> % ghc --numeric-version
That makes the makefiles a bit cleaner.
> I've seen this coming looooong before, and asked upstream to add this
> option :) (Unfortunately, options to print the path to the include
> files of the compiler have been ignored...)
> Basically, you can't. A while back a limitation of ghc wrt. libraries
> has been discovered. In particular, it is only guaranteed that a
> library works with the exact version (plus patchlevel) of the compiler
> it was compiled with. IOW, if it was compiled with
> ghc5-5.02.2-something, the Depends would look like:
> ghc5 (>= 5.02.2), ghc5 (<< 5.02.3)
Hmmmmm. Oh well, at least I can make the makefiles adapt, but the package
> The Debian revision _should_ be negligible. At least that's what is
> currently believed...
Only one way to find out.
> > Third, the library also supports a different haskell compiler, nhc98. Is
> > it possible to know which alternate package is installed to build the
> > correct version of the libraries. Maybe a grep on dpkg output or
> > something?
> You have to build them for _all_ compilers (and put each version into
> a different package).
Okay. No problem.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org