[arch-haskell] How to currently install haskell packages?
magnus at therning.org
Mon Mar 5 19:18:09 CET 2012
On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 03:11:44PM +0000, Xyne wrote:
> Magnus Therning wrote:
>> This episode has made me consider whether the tight dependency
>> between [haskell] and [extra]/[community] should be broken in the
> If you bring all of the Haskell packages currently spread across
> [extra] and [community] into [haskell] (including ghc), then you
> eliminate all of synchronization issues. You will have full control
> over topological rebuilds and you can ensure the the included
> packages form a compatible subset.
Yes, exactly. The biggest downside is the increase in number of
packages, but I'm confident our current tools are up to it. The
> Users can place [haskell] above [extra] in pacman.conf, which would
> avoid issues if ghc and some other packages remain in the official
> repos*. That should not be an issue though because I think there is
Indeed, the way pacman works support that scenario well. I've used it
for a while, using a private repo in order to "override" some packages
> a good chance that [haskell] could obtain official status. I don't
> remember exactly where I saw it, but just two days ago I found a
> wiki page or a mailing list post where the devs had stated that they
> would like to see more repos dedicated to specific goals. The
> [haskell] repo definitely qualifies.
That might be a nice bonus if that happened, especially if it would
mean access to build machines ;-). It's all it'd be though, a bonus.
> I truly believe that this would improve the Haskell experience on
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus at therning.org jabber: magnus at therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus
I invented the term Object-Oriented, and I can tell you I did not have
C++ in mind.
-- Alan Kay
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the arch-haskell