proposal for ghc-pkg to use a directory of .conf files
simonmar at microsoft.com
Mon Nov 22 12:07:36 EST 2004
On 21 November 2004 00:56, Isaac Jones wrote:
> The systems that would want to do this kind of thing, such as Debian,
> have other mechanisms for deciding whether packages conflict, etc.
IIRC, this is the argument I just used against adding support for
multiple libraries in Cabal, so I guess I agree :-D
> Over-all I'm kinda neutral about whether HC-pkg needs to be an opaque
> interface to the packaging system. What are the advantages to this?
Well, for one thing it allows us flexibility in how we store the package
database. In GHC, I'm using the show/read form of
[InstalledPackageInfo] to store the database, but it'd be nice if I
could use binary serialisation in the future.
To support a directory of config files, we don't have to expose the
complete format, though. As long as hc-pkg can process the
InstalledPackageInfo to produce the native format into a file, then we
just ship that file with the distribution. So I'm fine with this, as
long as we're not specifying the contents of the *.conf file.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users