<html><head><style>body{font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px}</style></head><body style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space"><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px;color:rgba(0,0,0,1.0);margin:0px;line-height:auto">On May 13, 2018 at 3:59:04 AM, Simon Marlow (<a href="mailto:marlowsd@gmail.com">marlowsd@gmail.com</a>) wrote:</div> <div><blockquote type="cite" class="clean_bq" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><span><div><div></div><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div>Will Stack also be broken for other GHC versions on Ubuntu 18.04, or does it only enable -g for 8.4+? i.e. even if we roll a new 8.4.3, will people still using 8.2.x have problems?</div></div></div></div></div></span></blockquote></div><p>Indeed, as best I undesrtand it, it will be broken on the 8.2 series as well. So anyone pinned to any older ghc (via a particular lts or daily) will continue to have this problem. From what I can tell, the -g flag is added basically universally. C.f. <a href="https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/blob/master/src/Stack/Build/Source.hs#L147">https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stack/blob/master/src/Stack/Build/Source.hs#L147</a></p><div><div><blockquote type="cite" class="clean_bq" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><span><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">The "purist" side of me agrees with you that this is a downstream issue. However, Stack doesn't have its own builds of GHC unlike Ubuntu, so it can't easily fix this by patching GHC. They could fix Stack to not use -g on affected distros / GHC versions though.</div></div></div></div></span></blockquote></div><p style="orphans: 2; widows: 2; ">As far as I know, stack does produce its own builds these days, although they should be conferred with, to confirm. In particular, see <a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fpco/stackage-content/master/stack/stack-setup-2.yaml">https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fpco/stackage-content/master/stack/stack-setup-2.yaml</a> which is where it draws the compilers it installs from. Currently all the urls seem to point to files hosted on <span style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><font color="#0000ee"><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"><u><a href="https://github.com/commercialhaskell/ghc/releases/">https://github.com/commercialhaskell/ghc/releases/</a></u></span></font><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> and from what I can tell there are far more ghc builds provided there than directly produced by ghchq. </span></span></p><p style="orphans: 2; widows: 2; "><span style="white-space:pre-wrap">—gershom</span></p><p><br></p><div><blockquote type="cite" class="clean_bq" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"><span><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">Cheers<br></div><div>Simon<br><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 12 May 2018 at 18:23, Gershom B<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gershomb@gmail.com" target="_blank">gershomb@gmail.com</a>></span><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I believe this list/group is intended to help set GHC release policies<br>and plan when releases occur.<br><br>I'd like to draw people's attention to<br><a href="https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/15068" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/<wbr>ghc/ticket/15068</a><br><br>I think that the "nay" side has the right of it.<br><br>1) To summarize my understanding: there is an issue with upstream gnu<br>binutils that are included in Ubuntu 18.04 and is triggered by GHC<br>_only_ when the -g flag for debug symbol output is passed. This bug is<br>triggered by GHCs going back through the 8.2 series. Note that 18.04<br>was released _after_ ghc 8.4.2.<br><br>There is a patch to GHC to work around this issue, that also<br>incidentally improves another possible issue with debug symbol<br>emitting.<br><br>Normally the -g flag is relatively rarely used, and by those who would<br>be able to work around such things. However, stack runs with -g by<br>default, unless users explicitly compile with symbol stripping turned<br>on.<br><br>The proposed solution is an 8.4.3 release of GHC with _just_ this patch.<br><br>2) To summarize my objection to the plan -- I do not think that<br>spinning up a full new release to just patch one thing to work around<br>an upstream bug is a good precedent for GHC release management. I can<br>imagine exceptional circumstances, but in general the right answer<br>should happen downstream of a full GHC release. We already want a more<br>timely cadence. That cadence should suffice for these sorts of things.<br><br>In the meantime, the binary provided by hvr's ubuntu ppa already<br>incorporates this patch.<br><br>One might say -- what about stack and platform users? My suggestion<br>would be that since stack provides its own binaries, patched binaries<br>can be provided by stack in this circumstance, just as the ubuntu ppa<br>includes the patch. Similarly we could respin a platform release with<br>the patch, just for linux, rather than across all three major<br>platforms. (Or not -- I don't think that users that know about -g<br>would mind too much using the ppa for the patched release, and I<br>suspect those users are more likely ppa users already anyway, or wise<br>enough not to immediately upgrade to a new ubuntu system for devwork<br>without time for bugs to shake out).<br><br>Anyway, I can't recall a precedent for a point-release over an issue<br>like this in the past, and I think if we start to do so too much it<br>will overstrain resources away from the important goals of regularity<br>and stability we do want in releases.<br><br>I would like to know what others think.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Gershom<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>Ghc-devops-group mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ghc-devops-group@haskell.org">Ghc-devops-group@haskell.org</a><br><a href="https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devops-group" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-<wbr>bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-<wbr>devops-group</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></span></blockquote><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></body></html>