scripts on unix

[Sven Panne]

On Thursday 15 March 2007 15:27, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> Sven Panne <sven.panne at aedion.de> wrote:
> >      And 'runhs' is actually not a very good name to run nhc98,
> > runnhc or runnhc98  would be much better IMHO.
>
> Well, I chose 'runhs', because it can equally well invoke ghc, hbc, yhc
> nhc98, or whatever.  It is an extension of hmake, which is
> compiler-independent.  You can configure which compiler get invoked by
> fiddling with your hmake-config options.

OK, I didn't know that. Then it's actually a home-grown special solution for 
the general problem update-alternatives is trying to solve. I propose to 
leave runhs as it is for now because of legacy reasons (perhaps deprecate it 
in the docs?), install a runnhc (or runnhc98? Same question for runhugs, as 
the corresponding executable is called hugs98. Hmmm...) in addition, and use 
update-alternatives in the .spec file. Making Haskell implementations behave 
more consistently would definitely improve the user experience.

For those not knowing what I'm talking about, I've digged up a nice blog about 
update alternatives:

   http://blog.stevenkroon.com/2006/08/29/debian-update-alternatives/1/

Although this article talks about Debian only, update-alternatives is used on 
openSUSE and Fedora as well, and probably other *nix platforms.

Cheers,
   S.