On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Brandon Allbery <allber...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is something of a nasty problem, considering that storing uninstall > information separately is not particularly robust. Perhaps ghc-pkg should, > if it doesn't already, support extension fields that e.g. cabal can use to > store uninstall information. (But even that potentially has problems, given > that people are known to copy package registration information between > package databases. If there is uninstall information in there, what happens > if someone uninstalls via one or the other copy?)
Aren't packages only allowed to install a restricted set of things into a restricted set of places? We have the code (.hi, .a, .so, etc., in import-dirs / library-dirs), possibly library-specific data (I assume that's data-dir), and haddock (haddock-html and haddock-interfaces, awkwardly in separate places). One problem is that I don't fully understand what those fields mean, is there documentation somewhere? And then the fact that these are all plural so presumably you could have a lot of them, what is that for? I'm guessing library-dirs means something like "put this on your -L line" so it's clearly a mistake to interpret that as "here's where I put the library", and you'll have things like /usr/local/lib if you need to link external libraries. Is there any more complicated install plan than put *.a, *.so, *.hi in $root/lib/$ghc/$package-$id, put haddock in $root/share/doc/$ghc/$package, put ad-hoc junk in $root/share/$ghc/$package? I assume there must be, but who's doing that and why? If it's OS packages, then they have their own uninstall mechanisms, presumably not ghc's problem. _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
