[Haskell-cafe] Re: ANNOUNCE: Utrecht Haskell Compiler (UHC) --
barsoap at web.de
Tue Apr 21 07:20:07 EDT 2009
Edward Middleton <emiddleton at bebear.net> wrote:
> > ghc 6.8.3 is /usr/bin/ghc on my office Mac, but nothing in the world
> > prevents there being some other program called ghc that would also
> > like to be there. Only by painstaking verification of a whole
> > bunch of applications together can one be confident of "safety".
> Well then I guess we agree, so the question becomes who should do the
> painstaking verification. I think distribution maintainers should do
> this, you think end users who can't compile source packages should do
Not the maintainers, but the tool. Portage doesn't install stuff if it
would overwrite other things, records changes to files in e.g. /etc to
be merged later (interactively, with diffs), and records every file it
ever installed by having the package install itself in
/var/portage/<package>/<version>. You are _completely_busted_ if your
install script doesn't support that: The script runs sandboxed.
Portage even registers every installed package into an empty ghc
package database, and merges them later. It knows what it does.
I can switch between different versions of packages, or different
implementations of the same functionality (say, java-sun vs.
java-blackdown) with eselect.
In short: Don't write your own install scripts, you're bound to get it
wrong, and/or be vastly inferior, compared to portage.
(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers
for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting,
performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe