Hi, Am Dienstag, den 25.08.2015, 14:13 +0200 schrieb Sven Bartscher: > On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:43:25 +0200 > Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Am Sonntag, den 23.08.2015, 16:42 +0200 schrieb Sven Bartscher: > > > We recently got a lot of rejects because of rpath lintian warnings. > > > After looking up what those mean, I'm confused why our packages set > > > the rpath. I would expect them not to bother with the rpath at all, > > > since they're statically linked. > > > Can anyone explain, why we have that issue? > > > > it’s simply a bug in Cabal: > > https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/2625 > > https://github.com/haskell/cabal/pull/2626 > > > > It is fixed upstream, but it takes a while to make it into a GHC > > release. We could try to backport that change to the Cabal in > > GHC-7.10, or simply try to include the latest Cabal in GHC-7.10, but > > previously, I was not comfortable patching GHC to such an extend. > > Now, with the ability to run "make-all" to verify the changes, such > > fixes are actually reasonable – but still quite a bit of work and > > waiting time. > > Instead of fixing GHC (and thus doing work that was already done by > upstream), we could patch haskell-devscripts, to use chrpath, to remove > the rpath from the binaries. that would also be an option. I don’t have a strong opinion on what’s best (lintian overrides until it is fixed by upstream, backporting the fix or Cabal, chrpath). Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: F0FBF51F JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part