Hi, Am Mittwoch, den 16.12.2009, 13:18 +1100 schrieb Trent W. Buck: > Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> writes: > > as can be seen on http://haskell.org/ghc/index.html, ghc6-6.12 is out, > > so we should think about how we want to tackle that upgrade. Some open > > questions are: > > http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/6.12.1/html/users_guide/release-6-12-1.html > Ian Lynagh wrote: > > > * Dynamic linking is now supported on Linux [...] > > * Shared libraries are now supported on x86 and x86_64 Linux. > > I assume that since we support other kernels (i.e. kFreeBSD) and other > architectures, dynamic linking is still a no-go? > > Is it worthwhile to enable dynamic linking by default on i386 and amd64, > while leaving everything else (e.g. kfreebsd-i386 and sparc) statically > linked? not sure, as there are ABI guarantees. Currently, our haskell-generated binaries (darcs, arbtt, the build-tools happy etc.) have no haskell dependencies, which is very good. If we would switch to dynamic linking, they would be uninstallable as often as library, and probably making binNMUing stuff to fix it a nightmare. Or would would have to introduce so-name-based packages, but that would require a lot of uploads to go through NEW. The only benefit would be smaller binaries, at the cost of additional dependencies. I’d say we completely ignore this possibility for now. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil