Suggestion for resolving the Cabal/GHC dependency problems

Carter Schonwald carter.schonwald at
Wed Sep 11 21:06:11 UTC 2013

wasn't there an effort to have a mini private variant of attoparsec for the
parser combinator deps?

On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at>wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Duncan Coutts <
> duncan.coutts at> wrote:
>> Actually, this is not quite right. Since ghc would still ship Cabal (but
>>  not depend on it), it would also ship its dependencies including parsec,
>> mtl and transformers. So they would need to be up to date and installed,
>> it's just that ghc itself would not depend on them.
>> If that's really inconvenient, it's plausible to have a minimal set
>> which is just the things ghc depends on, so long as what gets shipped to
>> users is the useful set, including Cabal.
> I don't quite like how GHC's dependencies leak out to the rest of the
> world. It makes it possible for us to decide what version we want to ship
> in the platform of those libraries. I guess we don't have a good technical
> solution to this problem though.
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list