Integrating editline with ghc

Alex Young alex at
Thu Jan 17 12:43:12 EST 2008

Yitzchak Gale wrote:
> Isaac Dupree wrote:
>> GHC is in no legal trouble whatsoever... only if proprietary Haskell
>> code uses the readline library and doesn't switch to using the editline
>> backend.
> Agreed. I didn't mean that GHC itself was ever in any
> legal trouble. But as a compiler, it must be possible for
> users to compile with it without getting into legal trouble.

Yes.  I'm still learning Haskell, and it's my intention to use GHC to 
produce commercial plugins for an application on Windows (and possibly 
OS X, haven't decided yet).  This whole discussion makes me worry - not 
because I have any intention to break any licences, but because I might 
do so by accident.  At this point in my learning, I've got no idea what 
will cause "problem packages" (problems from my point of view being ones 
that cause a phone call to a lawyer) to be linked in to my binaries.  It 
would be enormously helpful if there was a wiki page somewhere that said 
"To use GHC/mingw as a compiler for commercial software, it's likely you 
want to avoid these modules and command-line flags" or alternatively "To 
guarantee that no LGPL or GPL libraries are linked, use these flags".

The last thing I want is to cause myself extra work when someone chucks 
my plugin through a hex editor, sees a whole load of GMP symbols (for 
example) and demands some form of compliance that commercially I'd 
rather avoid.


More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list