System.FilePath Re[2]: ANN: HSH 1.2.0

Duncan Coutts duncan.coutts at
Tue Mar 13 21:38:39 EDT 2007

On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 01:22 +0000, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 01:06:10AM +0000, Neil Mitchell wrote:
> > 
> > >"runhaskell", "ghc --make" and hugs would all work.
> > >
> > >"ghc -package base -package Cabal" wouldn't, but I doubt that will trip
> > >anyone up given it won't be in any docs (and so anyone it does trip up
> > >probably knows how to fix it anyway).
> > 
> > Cabal users will have to explicitly depend on FilePath though, i.e.
> No they won't: If Setup.hs builds then it's installed, and besides, we
> don't need it any more if we've already built Setup. So there's no point
> in Setup.hs checking it's installed (which is the effect of adding a dep
> in the .cabal file, which I assume is what you meant).

There was this idea that cabal-setup should compile Setup.hs using only
a limited set of packages exposed. This is to stop unfortunate QA issues
where a developer makes a Setup.hs module that builds on his machine but
not on a users machine because they're missing some package.

So yes, cabal-setup would only let you import things from base and
whatever set of other core packages we can agree on.


More information about the Libraries mailing list