Dear Karel, Am Montag, den 02.01.2012, 18:06 +0100 schrieb Karel Gardas: > On 01/ 2/12 12:46 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > Dear Karel, > > > > I hope you don’t mind dragging this discussion onto d-haskell, the right > > forum for this, as we are maintaining GHC in a team. > > that's cool, let's see if I'm able to post to the list or it's > private. it’s public, that is Debian policy (and it would be easier if more project followed that). > > Am Montag, den 02.01.2012, 10:30 +0100 schrieb Karel Gardas: > >> let me ask, are you GHC debian developer/packager? If so, may I ask you > >> to switch to use registerised build on recent ARM machines and depend on > >> LLVM 3.0? i.e. when you use LLVM 3.0, then you are able to build GHC on > >> ARM in registerised way. GHC is using LLVM then for generating machine > >> code as there is no ARM NCG yet. I've tried a little bit to blog about > >> it on ghcarm.wordpress.com. > > > > thanks for the heads up. We are very interested in improving the Haskell > > situation on exotic architectures. > > That's great to hear since I did not hold this hope seeing debian > provides all the builds unregisterised. So very well and thanks a lot > for your effort! They are only unregistered because that’s the only thing that works, AFAIK. If there are more architectures where we are configuring ghc sub-optimally, I’d like to now about it. > Also please > note that I don't have armhf here yet, so this is completely untested. I > do have only armel here (ubuntu 11.04 + 11.10) on i.MX53 and Pandaboard. armhf only means that the code is compiled to use the hardware floating-point unit; I guess that would be internal to the C compiler and not visible to GHC; we’ll see. > > Do you expect any regressions in comparison with the unregistered, > > non-LLVM-build? > > If you are talking about regression from the GHC testsuite point of > view, then unfortunately the testsuite provides different sets of tests > for unregisterised and registerised builds, so this is not directly > comparable. Hmm, I think we might just gain if you, debian GHC team test > ARM registerised build on your set of haskell-based packages and report > directly to GHC trac any regression you see between unregisterised and > registerised builds. That would be absolutely fantastic if you do this > for us. > > Also for now, GHCi is not working and the build fails on GHCi annotation > for vector package. I'd like to thank you a lot for submitting all the > proper bug reports to the GHC trac. That's indeed, great. > we never had GHCi on armel, so that is not a regression. By regression I mean that some Haskell library or program that worked before would stop working. But I guess we can just try. I’ll prepare an upload now. I’m still a bit confused by the fact that not even the configure script seems to check for the llvm binary, but I’ll see how it goes. Greetings, Joachim -- 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