igloo at earth.li
Tue Mar 1 17:58:39 EST 2005
Sorry it took me so long to reply.
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 11:57:58AM -0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 02 February 2005 15:51, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> I bet the old GHC will work fine with the new readline.
You might be right, but I'd much rather not have to check it really does
before relaxing the dependency (which would also mean it couldn't be
> You want us to ship the readline package separately, say as a Cabal
> package? That's a possibility, but we like to keep the GHC sources as
> self-contained as possible,
I don't necessarily want /you/ to, I just want to be able to myself
without anything breaking. In fact, having thought about this a bit more
I think this already is the case, as nowadays a cabal package using the
readline package will have to specify it explicitly rather than GHC
noticing it uses an appropriate module and pulling it in automatically.
Thus an automated tool would generate a dependency on a suitably named
package and it would all work fine. Well, that was easy :-)
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users