[arch-haskell] [arch-general] (for Vesa and other Arch Devs on the list) Re: GHC 7.4.1 or HP 2011.4.0.0??

Peter Hercek phercek at gmail.com
Mon Feb 6 11:20:35 CET 2012

On 02/06/2012 09:45 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 21:18, Vesa Kaihlavirta<vpkaihla at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Magnus Therning<magnus at therning.org>  wrote:
>>> This was mainly directed to the Arch Devs on the list, and especially
>>> Vesa since he's putting in most of the work on GHC as found in
>>> [extra].
>>> We've already discussed the question of whether we should keep HP in
>>> Arch.  *I* think there was clear what the favoured route ahead was,
>>> but in the end it's the Arch Devs who decide.  I don't like the
>>> current situation (outdated GHC and outdated HP), so a decision would
>>> be much welcome then the work on catching up can begin.
>> Yeah, I noticed 7.4.1's release just now.
>> The question of HP and Arch was left in a limbo the last time, I feel.
>> The reason I started pondering about dropping HP earlier was that
>> there seemed to be no progress on it with regards to 7.2. Then it was
>> pointed out that 7.2 was sort of an unstable upstream release, so that
>> was the reason for HP not going with it.
>> So now I'm not so certain anymore about dropping it. We could again
>> wait for a while until HP catches up (it should be relatively fast
>> this time, since 7.4 is supposedly a real stable release) or just drop
>> it and go to 7.4.1 asap (and probably face some breakage). What do you
>> people think?
> Drop HP.  The main reason is that the goals of HP are opposite the
> goals of ArchLinux.

Yes, so far, users of this list clearly prefer to drop HP and move to 
7.4. (6 responses). One would prefer to stay with 7.0. At least 2 people 
of this list are OK if the upgrade to 7.4 means dropping packages 
provided that at least ghc itself and cabal-install are available.


More information about the arch-haskell mailing list