So this is hilarious. This whole time I thought 'warning' meant 'error'.<div><br></div><div>I rebuilt all of ghc and the platform with 7.0.3, and did it again. Now it complains about containers.</div><div><br>
</div><div>Went ahead and installed anyway (duh!). Now it looks like it worked. I'll check back if it didn't work.</div><div><br></div><div>I can't believe I never tried to just install the darn thing...<br clear="all">
Blaine<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Daniel Fischer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:daniel.is.fischer@googlemail.com">daniel.is.fischer@googlemail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Tuesday 15 November 2011, 22:34:17, Blaine wrote:<br>
> Great question. How does one ignore the warning?<br>
<br>
</div>Not.<br>
<br>
process and directory are boot packages, required by ghc and indirectly by<br>
many of the packages you install(ed).<br>
Having multiple versions of these spells trouble and breakage.<br>
Read <a href="http://www.vex.net/~trebla/haskell/sicp.xhtml" target="_blank">http://www.vex.net/~trebla/haskell/sicp.xhtml</a> for more.<br>
<br>
You already have two versions of directory, the one ghc was built with and<br>
1.1.0.1. It's not unlikely that you already have some unusable packages due<br>
to that.<br>
<br>
$ ghc-pkg check<br>
<br>
should tell you about such.<br>
You should unregister the duplicate directory (1.1.0.1, *keep the one ghc<br>
was built with*) and all packages depending on it.<br>
Then you can try to reinstall those packages, before cabal installing<br>
anything, you should check with --dry-run whether it would install a new<br>
version of any of the boot packages (basically everything coming with ghc<br>
itself, but having a newer version of Cabal is okay). If it would, stop.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>