Re: haskell-devscripts
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:37:37AM -0200, Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva wrote:
> please take a look at the haskell-devscripts package [0] I've made.
Seems ok to me, as far as it goes. But the copyright holders (Arjan
and John) should really be asked before changing debian/copyright
(sorry for this remark if you did). Building haddock docs for all
-doc packages seems overly generic. There are no haskell library
source packages that build multiple -doc packages currently but
there's no reason to prevent anyone from doing that. It should limit
making haddock docs for only one if there are more -doc packages.
You could have dropped all those checks for Cabal 1.2 out. Lenny has
that and I doubt anyone would use this haskell-devscripts version for
anything older than that.
Why's dh_haskell_install parsing and substituting fields in
installed-package-file? Those could have been already set via Cabal's
configure option.
Even so, IMHO, most of this seems like unnecessary work to me. The
whole haskell-devscripts could be streamlined by switching over to
hlibrary.mk. I think that dh_haskell_prep and dh_haskell_depends are
the only ones of the set that do anything that would justify using
perl. The rest are about generating new files and passing arguments
to the Cabal build system and that's more of make's domain. What each
of those 100+ lines long scripts do can be handled by a short (5 or so
lines long) makefile rule.
At least dh_haskell itself should be deprecated, as it makes ghc6 to
be called as root.
As an aside... Would anyone like to add a check to dh_haskell_prep
and make it fail noisily if debian/control didn't have all the
necessary haskell libraries listed as build dependencies?
Reply to: