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

Re: Feasibility of backports?


Am Donnerstag, den 08.12.2011, 20:51 +0100 schrieb Iustin Pop:
> I'm asking more from the point of view of upstream, rather than Debian
> packaging. I presume that due to the ghc6→ghc migration, doing backports
> for a few simpler packages (not yesod or such) is still not an easy
> task, right?
> A good example that I'm thinking about is aeson; it has about 5-6
> dependencies (I have no idea if these have in turn more dependencies
> which are not in squeeze), so I think it would take some effort but
> would be doable.
> Thoughts?

my thought is that if we do backports, then we should backport the
complete set of haskell packages, including ghc, so the ghc6→ghc
migration should not be a problem; we just do it in backports as well.

So it is basically a problem of rebuilding everything, i.e. of

Maybe, first someone should script something to rebuild ghc_7-* and
haskell-* on a Debian stable machine and provide an unofficial backport.
If that works out well and user demand is present, then we can consider
an official backport.


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: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: