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

Re: Let’s enter experimental

On Tue 16 October 2012 20:24:51 Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 16.10.2012, 13:33 +1300 schrieb Michael Cree:
> >    HC [stage 2] utils/haddock/dist/build/Haddock/GhcUtils.o
> > 
> > utils/haddock/src/Haddock/GhcUtils.hs:1:35:
> >      lexical error at character '\n'
> > 
> > make[2]: *** [utils/haddock/dist/build/Haddock/GhcUtils.o] Error 1
> > 
> > Full log is at:
> > http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=ghc&arch=alpha&ver=7.
> > 6.1-2&stamp=1349784016
> That is certainly strange. The file in question is just fine and builds
> ok on all other arches. The thing to note seems to be that this is the
> first file built by the stage 2 compiler. I assume this means that it is
> broken...
> You can report a bug at upstream:
> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc

Thanks, I've now done that; it's ticket #7339.

I've also realised that ghc first FTBFS at version 7.4.2 on Alpha.  I've got 
the unstable version (7.4.1-4) currently rebuilding to verify that it still 
builds successfully, and if it does then we know that the problem was 
introduced between 7.4.1 and 7.4.2.

> > I also see a lot of haskell packages coming through into the
> > experimental distribution
> Sorry that was a mistake by me: For some of them my dependency adjusting
> regex failed, and they built against 7.4.1 by accident (and by
> aptitude’s preference of unstable over experimental). Yesterday I have
> hopefull re-uploaded all affected packages.

OK, I won't upload the built packages then on Alpha.  Presumably when the re-
uploaded packages come through all those built ones will revert to BD-
uninstallable and can stay in that state until we get a working ghc in 


Reply to: