Re: GHC 6.10.1 uploaded to experimental
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 03:24:34PM +0200, Kari Pahula wrote:
> I've just uploaded haddock 2.4.1-1, ghc6 6.10.1-1 and a new build of
> mtl library to experimental.
Great stuff!
> I'm not quite sure about what to do with haskell-utils. While there
> isn't anything fundamentally wrong with it, I still don't like its way
> of building haskell library packages. I know that I'll convert any
> packages that I'm going to adopt, that use it, to haskell-devscripts
> along the way. I'll be adopting Igloo's library packages along the
> way, unless someone wants to call dibs.
If no-one's using it, feel free to remove it.
> As for the other thing that haskell-utils does, namely maintaining
> /var/lib/haskell-utils/compilers (see haskell-utils(8))... I don't
> know. AFAIK it's not used for anything, currently.
It used to be used for hmake. If it's not, or if triggers now provide a
better way of doing it, then again feel free to remove it.
> Can anyone think
> of a scenario where it could be useful?
> I don't expect to be maintaining multiple versions of GHC in Debian.
Something I never got around to doing was making it easy to use the
source packages to build a package called "ghc6.10.1" instead of
"ghc6", so that people could easily have multiple versions installed.
You'd probably run "make -f debian/rules versionise-me-please" before
building the package, and it would do some sedding or something. You'd
need to make sure that the paths didn't overlap, of course.
Binaries could be put in a different .deb archive, if people were
motivated to build and upload them. For bonus points, change the library
packaging to make building libghc6.10.1-foo-dev easy too.
That doesn't really have anything to do with what haskell-utils(8) is
for, but I just thought I'd mention it anyway.
> I'm not sure how handling documentation like this plays along with
> hugs. It may be enough if /usr/share/doc/$(whatever)-doc/html/ was a
> symlink to the corresponding directory under
> /usr/share/doc/ghc6-doc/libraries/.
Better would be for the symlink to point the other way, IMO.
Thanks
Ian
Reply to: