GHC 6.4 release candidates available (breakage on suse 9.2 x86
wolfgang.thaller at gmx.net
Wed Feb 23 13:39:24 EST 2005
> Thanks, good to know; I'll read through 10.2 more carefully. I didn't
> think I'd need to cross-compile x86-linux to x86-linux.
You don't need to - the recommended way is to download a binary
version. If you don't like using binary distributions, then use it for
bootstrapping only, i.e. use it to build a ghc of your choice and then
delete it again. This is just like what you usually do when you install
gcc on your box for the first time.
> Would it be unreasonable to include the unregisterised .hc files with
> a source distribution (or .hc files for "popular" platforms), so that
> a Haskell novice such as myself could do a "./configure && make &&
> make install"? If configure detected no ghc, perhaps it could do the
> bootstrap automagically.
Well, the contents of the .hc files heavily depend on the results of
./configure - so unregistered .hc files still have to be tailor-made
for the target platform.
As far as registerised .hc files for popular platforms go, I fail to
see the point. In what way is bootstrapping from platform-specific .hc
files superior to installing a binary (apart from the fact that it
takes longer and looks cooler)? It would be like shipping GCC as a
bunch of x86 .s files.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users