On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:25:30AM +1100, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
I've a patch which removes DPH from ghc-head, and a merge which
removes it from ghc-6.12, and I could successfully build
Unfortunately, we can't remove DPH from the boot packages yet.
However, as I suggested in my previous
On 17/03/2010, at 23:40, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:25:30AM +1100, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
I've a patch which removes DPH from ghc-head, and a merge which
removes it from ghc-6.12, and I could successfully build
Unfortunately, we can't remove DPH from the boot
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:49:12PM +1100, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
DPH is already built by stage 2. You were getting errors from the
stage 2 compiler which didn't support ghci. Here is the error
message from your original posting:
Oh, then I got confused by my different builds here.
In this
On 16/03/2010 22:01, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 09:50:41AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
Does anyone here care about portability? Some time ago (about three
years) someone told me that portability is an imporant goal for
ghc. Given that you now even need ghci to build ghc, this
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 09:50:41AM +, Simon Marlow wrote:
Does anyone here care about portability? Some time ago (about three
years) someone told me that portability is an imporant goal for
ghc. Given that you now even need ghci to build ghc, this portability
claim is obviously a lie.
On 17/03/2010, at 09:01, Matthias Kilian wrote:
No, sorry. If I'm seeing unnecessary requirements and all those
little hurdles that get in your way trying to get GHC work on a
non-first-tier platform, I get really upset. For sure I appreciate
your work on the new build system, but what else
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:25:30AM +1100, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
On 17/03/2010, at 09:01, Matthias Kilian wrote:
No, sorry. If I'm seeing unnecessary requirements and all those
little hurdles that get in your way trying to get GHC work on a
non-first-tier platform, I get really upset.
On 17/03/2010, at 12:58, Ian Lynagh wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:25:30AM +1100, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
On 17/03/2010, at 09:01, Matthias Kilian wrote:
No, sorry. If I'm seeing unnecessary requirements and all those
little hurdles that get in your way trying to get GHC work on a
On 14/03/2010 21:50, Matthias Kilian wrote:
This can't be true:
inplace/bin/ghc-stage2 -H32m -O-package-name dph-seq-0.4.0
-hide-all-packages -i -ilibraries/dph/dph-seq/../dph-common
-ilibraries/dph/dph-seq/dist-install/build
-ilibraries/dph/dph-seq/dist-install/build/autogen
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:54:02PM -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
kili:
ghc-stage2: panic! (the 'impossible' happened)
(GHC version 6.13.20100314 for x86_64-unknown-openbsd):
Cant do annotations without GHCi
{59:20-31}ghc-6.13.20100314:SpecConstr.NoSpecConstr{d rap}
Please
On 16/03/2010, at 06:03, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:54:02PM -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
kili:
ghc-stage2: panic! (the 'impossible' happened)
(GHC version 6.13.20100314 for x86_64-unknown-openbsd):
Cant do annotations without GHCi
kili:
ghc-stage2: panic! (the 'impossible' happened)
(GHC version 6.13.20100314 for x86_64-unknown-openbsd):
Cant do annotations without GHCi
{59:20-31}ghc-6.13.20100314:SpecConstr.NoSpecConstr{d rap}
Please report this as a GHC bug: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/reportabug
12 matches
Mail list logo
