On 2010/12/30 Magnus Therning <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 09:08, Rémy Oudompheng <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Since pacman's dependency specification is much less powerful than in >> Cabal, cabal2arch may output wrong version constraints while trying to >> approximate the true specified dependencies. I prefer this to dropping >> all version requirements when they cannot be expressed in the pacman's >> way. > > This sounds reasonable. However, do you have examples of dependencies > that CABAL can express but pacman can't? (I was under the impression > that the difference was that CABAL allowed more terse expressions, not > that it allowed more.)
See the issue reported by https://github.com/archhaskell/cabal2arch/issues#issue/19. PKGBUILDs can only specify dependency requirements with one inequality (<, >, <= or >=) whereas Cabal can specify any Boolean combination of inequalities. >> In order to get improved PKGBUILDs I thought we could have a better >> usage of the dependency resolution capabilities in the Cabal library, >> this is summed up in this commit >> >> http://github.com/remyoudompheng/archhaskell/commit/2e614b2 >> >> This adds an extra file, platform-provides.txt, that lists our >> preferred versions for various packages. For the moment I have filled >> it with the contents of Haskell Platform. > > Is it worth considering downloading this file dynamically, rather than > compiling it into the executable statically? It's been some time since these lists were not compiled in the executable. I have added a flag to cabal2arch (in my copy http://github.com/remyoudompheng/cabal2arch) to handle a custom directory or URL where these files could be stored. I am using mtl for error handling. Regards, -- Rémy. _______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
