The next step

Simon Marlow
Mon, 28 May 2001 11:55:40 +0100

> Don't libraries need their own build system anyway if they
> are to be portable?

I imagined putting the standard libraries in a single source repository.
By the "standard libraries", I mean loosely speaking those libraries
which are going to be distributed with most compilers (i.e. like the
current hslibs setup).  The libraries could have a standalone build
system, but at least for GHC this would mean duplicating most of the
fptools build system in the libraries tree (because we need to support
ways, GHCi .o files, DLLs, split object files etc. etc.), but NHC and
Hugs require a much more minimal build system.

> How do we want to handle libraries (eg, Gtk+Haskell) that
> * are in a different repository (Gnome repository) and/or
> * need special tools (C->Haskell)?

I wasn't planning to do anything differently to the way we have it now,
except that Gtk+Haskell gets allocated a place in the hierarchy.  It can
still be distributed separately and have a different license - and for
GHC at least you'll have to give extra flags such as '-package gtk' in
order to be able to import Graphics.UI.Gtk.