Kari Pahula wrote: > On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 04:48:07PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Am Dienstag, den 25.08.2009, 23:51 +0300 schrieb Riku Voipio: >>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:35:04PM +0300, Kari Pahula wrote: >>>> Please don't remove ghc6 on ia64 from unstable. ghc6 has a >>>> Build-Depends on ghc6 and the current 6.8.2 on ia64 is sufficient for >>>> building 6.12. >>> would dropping ghc6/ia64 from testing be still acceptable? that >>> would potentially allow ghc 6.10.x to testing for the rest of archs. >> this question was not answered yet (and I???m not sure if it was directed >> to the release team, the haskell team or the ia64 guys). I???d be in favor >> of that step. It would make > > Now that version 6.10.x has stayed out of testing so far, I'd rather > have it stay out too, until 6.12's release, just to make extra sure > that the current version doesn't end up in a release. I've patched > GHC's internal representation of ints to 32 bits and then to 64 bits > in a later version to make .haddock files arch independent and that > has broken Haskell binaries on users' file systems. > > It'd mitigate this somewhat if 6.10.x never entered testing. I'll > stick to upstream's way of storing integers within GHC again with > 6.12.1. > > I suppose I should file a bug about it.
Yes. Is there any ETA for when 6.12.1 will be released? Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
