[Haskell-cafe] Cabalizing darcs
philip.weaver at gmail.com
Wed Apr 23 20:25:12 EDT 2008
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Gwern Branwen <gwern0 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2008.04.23 12:26:35 -0700, Philip Weaver <philip.weaver at gmail.com>
> scribbled 1.2K characters:
> > It looks quite clean (no funny business in Setup.lhs). I would favor
> > using this cabalized version over the other. Thanks!
> > So, autoconf/configure generate cryptol.buildinfo from
> > cryptol.buildinfo.in. Did you change configure.ac much?
> I had to make a number of changes to configure.ac - the problem was
> that a lot of Darcs capabilities get modified through CPP; hence the
> darcs.buildinfo, to smuggle exported variables from the configure
> script to Cabal and to insert them in the correct fields. But not all
> of the necessary information was exported, so I had to fix that.
> Straightforward if you understand what you need. But there seems to be
> very little documentation on Cabal and buildinfos, so I had to do a
> bit of trial-and-error.... (Also, I dunno how you guys do Cryptol so
> can't speak to that.)
Trial-and-error was my experience with buildinfo files, too.
> > And the
> > Makefile is no longer needed at all, right?
> > - Phil
> Strictly speaking, the Darcs makefile does a lot of stuff besides just
> building and installing - it also generates various forms of
> documentation (Haddocks, the LaTeX manual for Darcs), run the tests,
> and do quite a bunch of miscellaneous stuff like support for some
> Windows installer and Debian package format. Some of this could no
> doubt be handled in a pure Cabal framework (ie. I understand Goerzen
> has a package which can automatically take a Cabal tarball and make a
> Debian source deb), but I was just aiming at the building part. If
> that's all you need (like most users), then the makefile isn't needed,
So do you feel like this process yielded an easier to maintain build system?
> BLACKER Loin JAVA anthrax AG Zemin The Internet Sayeret 3P-HV
More information about the Haskell-Cafe