Hi, Am Dienstag, den 17.04.2012, 08:20 -0400 schrieb Michael Alan Dorman: > Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> writes: > >> And, of course, there are all the other reasons that usually > >> recommend shared libraries---getting security fixes without requiring > >> recompiles, etc. > > > > Unfortunately, the benefit of „no recompiles“ does not apply to > > Haskell. > > In fact, I must say I was a little surprised at the and confused when I > first started installing Haskell -dev packages because it seemed like > things were set up to be installed in lockstep to a greater degree than > I've ever seen before---and I've been a Debian user since 1995, pre-ELF > shlibs, etc., and don't remember ever encountering anything like it. > > In that situation my natural inclination is to question whther that is > truly a necessity imposed upon us by upstream, or one we've accidentally > imposed on ourselves---it seems contrary to the way the vast majority of > language handles these issues. yes, it is in fact imposed by upstream. Before using a library, the compiler checks the exposed interface of all dependencies (by way of the package id, which contains a hash of the interface). All we do in Debian is to reflect these relations in the virtual package name. 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