Hi, Am Samstag, den 19.03.2011, 10:15 +0530 schrieb Joachim Breitner: > Am Freitag, den 18.03.2011, 09:34 +0530 schrieb Joachim Breitner: > > None of the outstanding issues on > > http://wiki.debian.org/Haskell/CollabMaint/GHC could as well be done in > > unstable, assuming the build failure is really related to dash in > > experimental (which is highly likely). > > actually, not true. I added the issue of the haddock interface version > (http://lists.debian.org/debian-haskell/2011/03/msg00049.html), which > should be implemented in experimental first. I started to work on it, and at least ghc-doc now depends on haddock via a virtual package haddock-interface-<n>. But what about the library documentation packages, libghc-foo-doc? Currently, our -doc packages do not depend on anything (makes sense, as they contain HTML that is useful without anything else). ghc-doc and the documentation packages of dependencies is only recommended. But if haddock changes the interface, and old -doc packages are still around, the ghc-doc trigger will fail (or spit out ugly error messages). Ideally, we could say "Conflict: haddock-interface-<anything but 16>", but that is not possible. If we add haddock-interface-<n> to the dependencies of the -doc packages, this problem goes away, and only valid combinations can be installed. But haddock depends on ghc, so people could not install the doc without installing all of ghc. Which is more desireable? Greetings, Joachim PS: Haddock really has to depend on ghc to be useful: # dpkg --force-depends -P ghc # echo 'module Foo where foo = undefined' >> Foo.hs # haddock Foo.hs haddock: can't find a package database at /usr/lib/ghc-7.0.2/package.conf.d -- 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