Priorities for 6.10
ndmitchell at gmail.com
Thu Jun 19 07:12:51 EDT 2008
> > Does anyone have any objections to us doing this? I agree it would be a
> > substantial win. We should consider cabal-install to be a part of Cabal -
> > indeed the 'cabal' command is the preferred UI for Cabal now, so to ship
> > one without the other seems wrong.
> We'll also have to include the zlib and HTTP packages, which are
> dependencies of cabal-install.
Why? I want to ship a binary cabal.exe, which will be pre-linked. If
they want to upgrade cabal, then you'll need to do a cabal install of
them (which is trivial with cabal-install), but otherwise there is no
need for zlib or HTTP.
> BTW, someone will have to figure out how cabal.exe can replace its own
> executable file when it wants to upgrade itself (which is pretty
> important to making the thing self-sustaining).
Yes, that is important, but needs to be tackled anyway.
More information about the Cvs-ghc