new Library Infrastructure spec.

[Iavor S. Diatchki]

hello,

this discussion has become rather confusing, i lost track of all the 
roles that were intrduced,
so forgive me if i am asking an obvios question.  is the following 
possible (and simple):

i am a linux user, and i want to download and play with a haskell 
(binary) library (say wxHaskell).
however i am at university, where i don't have root permisions, so i 
cannot use rpm
(as it has fixed installation path).  so i just want to put the library 
in my home directory and use it,
but i don't want to have to recompile it, as this is slow and may 
require tools i don't have or i don't
know how to use.  furthermore, if i don't like the library i should be 
able to still delete it,
and somehow inform my haskell implementation that the library is not 
there anymore.

i have been in such situations very often (on windows machines too), and 
i hope that with the
LIP this is not too hard to do. 

bye
iavor



Simon Marlow wrote:

>On 09 June 2004 20:29, S. Alexander Jacobson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The proposal should simply define the file format
>>that Angela and Peter use to deliver Haskell
>>packages to Wally.  A Haskell package is
>>some combiation of:
>>
>>   * Haskell source
>>   * binary libs for the target platform,
>>   * documentation,
>>   * data,
>>   * and meta-data
>>    
>>
>
>I don't think you're suggesting anything that isn't already covered by
>the proposal.  Others have already responded to that effect, but I'll
>reiterate: there are several kinds of binary package which the end user
>can install.  These include:
>
> 1. Platform-native packages: RPM, Debian, Windows MSI, etc.
> 2. Generic binary distribution, generated by './Setup.lhs bdist'
>
>I believe what you're asking for is (2).  These binary distributions can
>be installed by anyone with a Haskell compiler on their system, by
>unpacking the distribution and invoking './Setup install'.
>
>However, I don't consider (2) to be a priority.  Funcionality-wise,
>binary distributions are less desirable than platform-native packages,
>because they don't deal with installing dependencies and they don't let
>you uninstall the package later.  When installing software, it is good
>practice to co-operate with the system's native packaging system.
>
>(2) is useful on systems that don't have a native packaging system, e.g.
>Solaris.  However, on those systems, Joe User can usually just become
>Bob and install packages from source (it's not hard; just do
>'./Setup.lhs configure; ./Setup.lhs build; ./Setup.lhs install').
>
>Cheers,
>	Simon
>_______________________________________________
>Libraries mailing list
>Libraries at haskell.org
>http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>  
>