[Haskell-cafe] GSoC: Improving Cabal's Test Support
dagit at codersbase.com
Thu Apr 1 23:37:18 EDT 2010
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Rogan Creswick <creswick at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Thomas Tuegel <ttuegel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > At this point, the package author need only run:
> > $ ./Setup configure
> > $ ./Setup build
> > $ ./Setup test
> My general feeling has been that Setup is being discouraged in favor
> of using 'cabal <foo>', but I don't have any solid evidence for that
> (and I could very well be wrong!). They do do slightly different
> things, so I think it's wise to figure out which idiom is most likely
> to be used and work with that.
I haven't figured out how it's possible, but I'm convinced that ./Setup
configure vs. cabal configure can lead to a different set of dependencies
being selected. This can lead to diamond dependency problems. (I'm
convinced this happen on at least one machine I know of.)
What I don't understand is how it's possible for the discrepancy to happen.
It's as if ./Setup and cabal-install use different algorithms for
dependency resolution, but as I understand it, both should be using the
Cabal library for that. My only other thought is that perhaps ./Setup uses
a different version of the Cabal library than what cabal-install uses.
Perhaps Duncan can comment on this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe