On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 11:31:28 +0100 Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> wrote: > Hi, > > we need a decision about what to do with Haskell on armel. Is there a use case for haskell on armel that anyone knows / cares about? That would determine whether haskell could be removed without worries about it being a one-way change. Are there particular haskell packages which could be relevant to a NAS-type installation or other minimal installation-size server setup? Typical armel devices don't have endless Gb of storage for the rootfs. > Recall that the Haskell compiler GHC has recently improved its support > for (recent forms of) ARM, and a new release (7.10.3) with that is > expected real soon. This has been sitting in experimental for far too > long, and as soon as 7.10.3 is out proper, I’d really like to upload > this to unstable and have a quick (i.e. as quick as mips can build) > migration to testing. > > But in 7.10.3, upstream has (inadvertently) broken support for ARMv4, > i.e. armel. See https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11058 for > details. It does not look as if we can rely on this getting fixed > until the release. > > So it seems that the only way forward would be to drop Haskell on > armel completely from unstable, as anything else will prevent its > migration to testing. (It is not sufficient to drop it in testing, as > still all packages would be considered as out-of-date by britney.) > But this is particularly annoying as bootstrapping Haskell (should > support come back eventually) is a slightly annoying and manual task. > > We do not want to revert the breaking change in Debian, as it fixes > other relevant problems with Haskell on arm (well, armhf and arm64 > only). > > Are there any other approaches worth considering? For the benefit of the haskell list, note that the ARM BoF at DebConf considered wider issues relating to armel: > Should we keep it for Stretch? Maybe with subarchitecture support, > when available. We still have some users, but not *many*. tbm would > miss it and is still supporting quite a lot of users. Could we get the > people who care about armel to do a minimally-supported LTS for > Jessie/Stretch? Typical users are now on NAS boxes or some > Freedomboxes, just using server software - no X, no graphics etc. > Should be possible? https://lists.debian.org/debian-arm/2015/09/msg00038.html -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpttM0dbgmNj.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature