<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/1/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Malcolm Wallace</b> <<a href="mailto:Malcolm.Wallace@cs.york.ac.uk">Malcolm.Wallace@cs.york.ac.uk</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
"Alexey Rodriguez" <<a href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>> I have been trying to build hmake 3.12 using ghc-6.6 on a Fedora Core<br>> Linux running on a dual 64-bit Opteron machine. However, I had the
<br>> following error related to the readline library:<br>> ...<br>> I googled for this error and I saw the following thread in which<br>> Malcolm suggested having a fix.<br>> <a href="http://www.nabble.com/hmake-and-GHC-6.6-t2531880.html">
http://www.nabble.com/hmake-and-GHC-6.6-t2531880.html</a><br>> I tried to locate hmake's repository but to no avail. There is no link<br>> to it from <a href="http://www.haskell.org/hmake">www.haskell.org/hmake</a> and the hmake in the nhc repository
<br>> is the same as the hmake I downloaded.<br><br>hmake does indeed live in the nhc98 darcs repository at<br> <a href="http://darcs.haskell.org/nhc98">http://darcs.haskell.org/nhc98</a><br>From there, you can do a 'make hmakeDist' which will package up a
<br>tarball of just the parts needed to build hmake. I will also make a<br>proper bugfix release soon.</blockquote><div><br>Finally I got it to build with a two line change.<br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> P.S. A related question, has any of you tried to build ghc using hat?<br>> I am trying to do this to study ghc's internals<br><br>I'm pretty sure you will not get ghc to build with Hat. The source code<br>of ghc uses many glasgow extensions, not all of which are (yet) handled
<br>by Hat's parser. The unsupported ones include at least unboxed types,<br>and pattern guards. (MPTC, fundeps, existentials etc are OK however).</blockquote><div><br>Oh, that's such a pity. I'll have to read the sources in the usual style.