haskell-devel September 2008

haskell-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
67 discussions

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 --- Comment #21 from Bryan O'Sullivan <bos(a)serpentine.com> 2008-09-05 11:59:45 EDT --- Re comment #15: The makefile step is not necessary for correctness, but it makes a big difference to build performance: it lets us build most of a package in parallel using _smp_mflags. Cabal itself won't have the ability to do parallel builds for a long, long time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 --- Comment #20 from Rajesh Krishnan <fedora(a)krishnan.cc> 2008-09-05 09:44:18 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=315906) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=315906) macros.ghc - Removed a bunch of 'echo' trace statements. A minor cleanup of the macros.ghc file I attached earlier. Removed a bunch of unimportant 'echo' statements. -Rajesh Krishnan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 --- Comment #19 from Rajesh Krishnan <fedora(a)krishnan.cc> 2008-09-05 09:32:03 EDT --- Here is another problematic Hackage cabal package: Crypto-4.1.0: http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/Crypto SRPM: http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/SRPMS/ghc-crypto-4.1.0-1.fc9.src… SPEC: http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/SPECS/ghc-crypto.spec Macros: http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/MISC/macros.ghc (tested on F9 + GHC-6.8.3 installed, on x86_64). The problems with this package are: 1. The package has mixed case package name (name starts with a capital letter). 2. The package contains a number of executables (besides a library), but all of those are test executables (not normally executed by end-users). The way I solved these issues are are follows: 1. Mixed case is already taken care of the updated macros.ghc script I have attached. 2. Because the package contains executables, the default package name as per the Fedora Haskell Specification would be crypto-*.rpm and not ghc-crypto-*.rpm. The following are noteworthy for this package: 1. The library package are named ghc-crypto-<ver>.fc9.<arch>.rpm as per the specification because they contain the library and associated library documentation. 2. The profile packages are named ghc-crypto-prof-<ver>.fc9.<arch>.rpm as per the spec. 3. I have an additional devel package called ghc-crypto-devel-<ver>.fc9.<arch>.rpm that contains all the test executables: $ rpm -ql ghc-crypto-devel /usr/bin/HMACTest /usr/bin/QuickTest /usr/bin/RSATest /usr/bin/SHA1Test /usr/bin/SymmetricTest for this case I am violating the current cabal package specification (which are not set in stone I hope) for some (IMHO) good reasons 1. The test executables are not normally required by end-users. 2. The test executables are not normally required by even developers who require compile their code against the library (contained in the main rpm) and would probably never need these executables either. 3. These test executables don't seem to fit into the -prof package either. 4. I thought of dumping these test executables under the libexec folder like (/usr/libexec/ghc-crypto) but for some reason didn't feel that was appropriate. 5. So the only option was to spin-off another package that is named appropriately (-devel). 6. I didn't feel like giving the too-important sounding name "crypto-*.rpm) of a package that contains just a handful of (mostly unnecessarily) test executables. Hence I have named this ghc-crypto-devel-*.rpm (and not crypto-*.rpm or crypto-devel-*.rpm) in order to emphasize its affinity to the actual rpm and source (ghc-crypto*.rpm). Please review the package and let me know if we could do this differently or in any other way. YAAKOV/JENS: If you (mostly) agree with the above logic, then we might need to update the Fedora Haskell Packaging specification as follows: 1. For packages that contain executables that are only related to testing of the package (not something that end users would usually need) the RPM for such a package should be named as ghc-<PACKAGE>.*.rpm and not simply <PACKAGE>.*.rpm, assuming its cabal file contains a library section. 2. For packages that contain executables that are related to testing only (and other executables that may not normally be reuqired by end-users), the .SPEC for such an RPM may define a -devel section containing only those test executables. 3. For other packages that contain end-user oriented executables and/or libraries, the general rules defined in the Fedora Haskell Packaging Specification would apply as usual. Feedback is welcome. -Rajesh Krishnan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 --- Comment #17 from Rajesh Krishnan <fedora(a)krishnan.cc> 2008-09-05 06:51:40 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=315875) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=315875) macros.ghc that is required to build Hackage cabal based packages with mixed-case package names. Place this file in /etc/rpm to build the following example package (that uses this): http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/SRPMS/ghc-cabal-1.4.0.2-2.fc9.sr… -Rajesh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 Rajesh Krishnan <fedora(a)krishnan.cc> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora(a)krishnan.cc --- Comment #16 from Rajesh Krishnan <fedora(a)krishnan.cc> 2008-09-05 06:49:28 EDT --- Everyone, The default Yaakov's macros.ghc or Jens' macros.haskell are NOT adequate for building cabal packages that have mixed-case package names. I had to modify those a little bit to get the test package (Cabal-1.4.0.2) working: For the updated macros.ghc that could build a mixed-case cabal package, look at: http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/MISC/macros.ghc For the updated macros.haskell that could build a mixed-case cabal package, look at: http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/MISC/macros.haskell The files are quite small, so open either of those along with the corresponding original ones in Kompare (or any other favorite diff program you prefer) to note the differences (there are a few 'echo' traces in the file, let me know if they are not needed and I would remove those). For an example of package (with a mixed-case package-name) that builds with this updated macros.ghc file, look at: http://krishnan.cc/devel/repository/fedora/SRPMS/ghc-cabal-1.4.0.2-2.fc9.sr… This is important because there are a lot of cabal based packages in Hackage that have mixed-case package names. I have already mentioned this before on the Fedora Haskell List where I submitted Cabal-1.4.0.2 package for review. I am attaching both here along with this comment. -Rajesh Krishnan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 --- Comment #15 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-09-05 05:23:56 EDT --- I am not sure if %_cabal_makefile is really necessary? eg ghc-X11 seems to build fine without it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 426751] Review Request: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics library.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426751 --- Comment #21 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-09-05 05:22:00 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=315852) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=315852) ghc-X11.spec Here is a slightly revised spec file without the macros embedded using the latest macros I attached to bug 460304 - tested and builds on rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Sep '08

05 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #315737|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #14 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-09-05 01:08:30 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=315829) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=315829) macros.ghc I talked a bit to Yaakov (loupgaroublond) on #fedora-devel and hope we understand each other a bit better now. Here is a slight update which fixes %ghc_gen_filelists (renamed as it is implementation dependent as Yaakov pointed out to me). I hope this can be close to a final version which is acceptable to all parties. I am kind of tempted to remove %cabal_install also since it is pretty trivial, but maybe it is ok. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 460304] Add macros to GHC for packaging cabal packages for GHC
by Red Hat Bugzilla 04 Sep '08

04 Sep '08

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460304 --- Comment #13 from Tom Moertel <tom(a)moertel.com> 2008-09-04 23:44:39 EDT --- Yaakov, thanks for explaining your concerns in detail. In reviewing Jens's spec for ghc-X11, it appears that it avoids your primary concern by passing the "--ghc" flag during the initial Cabal-setup invocation: %build %cabal_configure -p --ghc <= HERE %cabal_makefile %cabal build %cabal haddock %ghc_gen_scripts According to the Cabal documentation, this flag ensures that Cabal will use GHC for the later stages of Cabal processing, regardless of which Haskell implementation runhaskell invokes. (Ref: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/Cabal/builders.html#setup-confi…) So even if runhaskell invoked NHC, for example, Jens's spec would still build a GHC package. Do you think using Cabal-setup flags to specify the desired compiler will adequately resolve your concern about hidden compiler dependencies? Cheers, Tom -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

haskell-devel September 2008