HP 2013.2 and GHC 7.6.2
johan.tibell at gmail.com
Wed Apr 17 17:32:11 CEST 2013
Even though there's some risk bumping the Cabal version used in GHC, I
think it would be worth it given that quite a few people have tripped
over the bugs fixed in 220.127.116.11.
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Iavor Diatchki
<iavor.diatchki at gmail.com> wrote:
> cabal-install 1.16.0 and 18.104.22.168 have some serious bugs that one encounters
> rather quickly. For example, at work I wasted some time until I figured out
> that cabal was generating a 'Paths_' module that does not compile.
> Because of this, you can't even use it to install a newer version of itself,
> where the problem is fixed: you have to manually bootstrap the new version
> with the script!
> I think it would be quite unfortunate to make yet another GHC release that
> ships with it, let alone add it to the Haskell platform.
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Ian Lynagh <ian at well-typed.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 02:48:26PM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
>> > In the absence of a GHC-7.6.3, I'm not sure if it's practical for the HP
>> > to bump the Cabal version.
>> My proposal was 7.6.3 was a minimal release in a very short timeframe,
>> to just fix #7748. Any additional changes introduce a possibility of
>> regression. If you think that 7.6.2+1.16.0 would be OK, then it sounds
>> like the fixes in 22.214.171.124 wouldn't be worth the risk (there are a
>> number of GHC fixes that we won't be merging either, for the same
>> ghc-devs mailing list
>> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
More information about the Libraries