Suggestion for resolving the Cabal/GHC dependency problems

[Carter Schonwald]

wasn't there an effort to have a mini private variant of attoparsec for the
parser combinator deps?


On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Johan Tibell <johan.tibell at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Duncan Coutts <
> duncan.coutts at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, this is not quite right. Since ghc would still ship Cabal (but
>>  not depend on it), it would also ship its dependencies including parsec,
>> mtl and transformers. So they would need to be up to date and installed,
>> it's just that ghc itself would not depend on them.
>>
>> If that's really inconvenient, it's plausible to have a minimal set
>> which is just the things ghc depends on, so long as what gets shipped to
>> users is the useful set, including Cabal.
>
>
> I don't quite like how GHC's dependencies leak out to the rest of the
> world. It makes it possible for us to decide what version we want to ship
> in the platform of those libraries. I guess we don't have a good technical
> solution to this problem though.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130911/d2e320d8/attachment.htm>