Taking binary from hackage or GHC?

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

Am Mittwoch, den 08.02.2012, 11:24 +0100 schrieb Joachim Breitner:
> Dear interested parties :-),
> 
> GHC 7.4.1 started to ship and expose the binary library, version
> 0.5.0.3. On hackage is binary-0.5.1.0. In Debian, we try to provide one
> version of each library, so we have to decide:
> 
>  * Use the version provided by GHC and drop the independent binary
> package (as we have done with random, for example).

That should not be random (which went the other way, from GHC to a
package of its own), but deepseq.

It seems that upstream recommends to take this path, so I’ll request
removal of the package soon.

@DHG: This means that the version constraint on the libghc-binary-*
dependencies need to be removed, as ghc provides libghc-binary-dev, but
such provides never carry a version number in Debian. The build
dependency itself can stay; it doesn't hurt and will prevent failed
builds if some future GHC packages stops exposing binary.

Greetings,
Joachim
-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata at debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20120208/03ce5140/attachment.pgp>