On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 00:26 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 00:07 +0100, Ross Paterson wrote:
> > To elaborate, when cpphs is called from the haddock phase, it's not > > passed the cpp arguments that are used by build. I think Cabal needs > > a cpp-options field, for cpp options needed for Haskell source. They're > > currently in cc-options or compiler-specific option fields, but they > > don't really belong there. > > Yes, Lennart Kolmodin was just investigating this problem for Gentoo and > came to a similar conclusion. > > We can't pass all the cc-options to hsc2hs or cpphs, we'd have to filter > them which seems a bit ugly. The other ugly option is to add these flags > to ghc-options. > > Anyone got a suggestion for what to do in the short term (ie the 1 week > 'til the ghc & cabal release) ? I've got a nice 1 line fix. We've tested it now with all the ghc-extralibs in gentoo. The fix will be included in the next Cabal release candidate. Duncan _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
