Proposal: overhaul System.Process
bulat.ziganshin at gmail.com
Tue May 27 08:45:51 EDT 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008, 4:36:29 PM, you wrote:
> I use hackage quite a bit, though admittedly it's only been with gcc
> 6.8.2. However, the code is open source; I don't imagine that updating
> hackage libraries would be any worse than many of the other library
> updates, bugfixes and so on I've had to do over the years.
but it will be better to see things that just continue to work with
every new ghc version instead of modifying all the libs
> Again, I'm different; I keep source copies of most hackage libraries
> in my build framework for each application, and I can very easily keep
> local patches.
yes, i'm doing the same. but i don't think that it's good way
>> d) never released open-source software
> You'd best stick to what you know about; I've been working on and
> helping to release major pieces of open source software (e.g., NetBSD)
> for fifteen years now, and have had plenty of packages for which I was
> the sole or primary maintainer.
> The basic issue here, I think, is that you're probably just using
> inferior build systems, and so some things are harder for you than they
> are for me. You probably won't believe that, because of course everybody
> thinks that whatever they are currently doing is pretty much the best
> possible way there is to do it.
well, just imagine how it will work if gcc libraries will be changed
every year :) does "superior build system" means that you will keep
15 copies of every library, one-per-year?
Bulat mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com
More information about the Libraries