[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Let ghc6 Provide ghc6-ghci?

On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 11:16:13PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Am Montag, den 03.05.2010, 21:56 +0200 schrieb Joachim Breitner:
> > seeing all those build failures of various TH using packages on some
> > arches, and the inconsistent  handling of it (Architecture field,
> > Not-for-Us, just letting it fail), I thought of a possibly cleaner and
> > easier solution.

I wasn't thinking of doing any uploads that'd introduce new binary
packages until after the release.  IMHO, any ghc6 uploads could
potentially be too disruptive at this point.

> > Wouldn’t it be very easy for the ghc6 package to add another virtual
> > package into the Provides: line, indicating that this build supports
> > ghci/TH? Maybe “ghc6-ghci” (or something better – I don’t care :-))?

AFAIK specifying architectures in control fields only applies to B-D
and the like.  I can't use Provides like that.

I would rather use a proper package for that.  It would be a lean one
but it could still be a place for ghci and runhaskell.

> no replies so far. Kaol, would you prefer if I’d open wishlist bugs
> against ghc6 for such ideas, so that they are not forgotten in case you
> don’t have the time to think about them immediately?

I've thought about this myself and will implement it later.  That I'm
lazy to write emails is nothing new.  Sorry.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: