Hi. Excerpts from Joachim Breitner's message of Sex Mai 07 10:56:17 -0300 2010: (...) > One big problem is cyclical dependencies. Assume we start building > libraries including leksah meta data. Then leksah-server would be a > build dependency for every haskell package. But to build leksah-server, > we need to build mtl first – a classical chicken-and-egg problem. For > tools like hscolour, it is not too bad, because they have no > dependencies besides ghc6. > > Now this could be worked around by manually bootstrapping leksah once. > Or by making the build not fail if no leksah is available, and then > “bootstrap” packages with a “dummy leksah” package. Or something like > this – our problem :-) > > I’m still doubtful that the ghc6 maintainer will be willing to add > another dependency, so for the libraries shipped with ghc6, we have to > think of something else. I thought about a solution to this problem. If leksah files were shipped in another different package, we could build the -leksah packages from ghc6 and the dependencies of leksah-server, like mtl, in the source package of leksah-server. (...) > I still think it would be great if you could make the .lkshp generating > a plugin to cabal, so that users (not only of Debian) automatically get > the .lkshp file when building with anything with cabal (of course > configurably). Cabal can also provide you with pre-processed source > files, where required. > > Another strange idea: Maybe you can make a haddock wrapper that will > extend it to write .lkhsp files along .haddock files when called with > -D? > > (My goal is to have .lkhsp files always generated when a package is > build: On the Debian build hosts when using a pre-built package; by > cabal when using cabal build or cabal install – I hope this vision makes > sense to you :-)) This is the ideal, and it may worth more to do this than to invest in the Debian specific infra-structure. (...) Excerpts from Joachim Breitner's message of Ter Jun 01 17:53:42 -0300 2010: (...) > Am Dienstag, den 01.06.2010, 22:38 +0200 schrieb Jürgen > Nicklisch-Franken: > > the patch has been submitted and will be added to Process for the > > next release: > > hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/3994 > > So this is a temporary workaround only, and the dependency will > > disappear with the next Compiler/Base package versions. > > Judging from the ticket, I see no indication that the patch was accepted > yet, and darcs changes --repo http://darcs.haskell.org/packages/process/ > does not list it. If it's confirmed that the patch is going to the next release, it'll be easier to convince the ghc6 maintainer to apply it in a next upload of ghc6 to Debian. If not, what are the other possibilities? Is it possible to inline the changes in process in leksah code, that is, instead of patching process, patch leksah? If both of these show out to be impossible, or unlikely, I think that uploading process-leksah to the archive is not such a bad idea. It's certainly not such a good one either, but it can fit as a temporary solution, and it's better than staying without leksah at all. (...) Excerpts from Jürgen Nicklisch-Franken's message of Ter Jun 01 18:33:36 -0300 2010: (...) > > Please understand that we want software that builds with unmodified > > versions of compilers and base libraries in Debian. > > We have neither modified the compiler, nor base packages. You have modified a basic library, which is shipped along with the compiler. > > Maybe it would make more sense to host Debian packages for leksah on > > leksah.org first? Is one of you, Jürgen or Hamish, using Debian himself? > > Or maybe you know of interested Leksah users on Debian? In that case I’d > > provide you with the initial packaging and you can then build and > > distribute the built packages yourself until it is ready for inclusion > > in Debian proper. I’d prefer not to do this myself, but I’ll be happy to > > help and guide whoever wants to maintain such unofficial packages. > > I'd prefer as well if someone else would do this. (...) > > PS: Maybe someone else on DHG feels like taking care of such packages > > and working with the Leskah team? Think about it: Releasing package > > without waiting for a DD to upload them :-) > > Seeing your vain personality as "DD", I understand why Debian Haskell > Packages are always this outdated and unusable :-) This was so unnecessary. Joachim was being helpful and supportive, and your reply was agressive with him and with the whole Debian Haskell Group. Having Leksah in Debian will be good to both the Debian people and the Leksah developers. We have a common goal, and we should work together to make it happen. These kind of comments are counter productive. And just a clarification: http://wiki.debian.org/Haskell/Platform . I don't see anything outdated and unusable here. Currently, Leksah is unusable. Let's work to fix it. Greetings. (...) -- marcot http://wiki.debian.org/MarcoSilva
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature