Test Cases for Configurations

Bjorn Bringert bringert at cs.chalmers.se
Fri Jun 15 05:31:56 EDT 2007

On Jun 15, 2007, at 1:26 , Ross Paterson wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 12:48:17AM +0200, Thomas Schilling wrote:
>> it's still a little work to do, but I think I'll be able to try and
>> use Cabal configurations some time next week.  Do you guys have any
>> ideas what we could use as a good test case?
>> The goal is to find out how well the current scheme applies to actual
>> use cases (and if there are serious performance problems to await).
> As Simon mentioned, there's HGL depending on either unix or Win32.
> The fps package was incorporated into base-2.0, so packages like  
> binary,
> bzlib, zlib, darcs-graph or hmp3 could depend on base >= 2.0 or  
> (base <
> 2.0 and fps).
> The html package was split off from base-2.0.  For this reason HAppS
> has two variants of its Cabal file, which could be combined under
> configurations.  Similarly lambdaFeed could depend on base < 2.0 or
> (base >= 2.0 and html).
> The above are all in HackageDB.  The HEAD has a few more examples:
> Several packages are split off from base (but its version number  
> hasn't
> been incremented yet, so you can't use that).
> The process package has a Setup.hs that exists only to drop the
> System.Process module for implementations other than GHC.
> The time package has a Setup.hs that adds a dependency on Win32 if the
> platform is Windows.

The unix-compat package depends on the unix package when not compiled  
on Windows, using Setup.lhs and CPP hacks.

More packages with the usual base/fps thing: cgi, fastcgi, tar, htar,  


More information about the cabal-devel mailing list