Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-06 Thread Ketil Malde
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH allb...@ece.cmu.edu writes:

 I wonder when we'll get a good haskell virtual package on Debian?

 What would this package do?

 Install ghc + all the little pieces of libghc6-cruft needed to get a
 sane working environment?

Sounds easy to do (after all, it's just an empty package with a bunch
of dependencies, right?), but I'm unsure exactly what pieces you want
included. 

This is the current ghc6 package:

  Provides: ghc, haskell-compiler, libghc6-array-dev, libghc6-base-dev, 
libghc6-bytestring-dev, libghc6-cabal-dev, libghc6-containers-dev, 
libghc6-directory-dev, libghc6-filepath-dev, libghc6-haskell98-dev, 
libghc6-hpc-dev, libghc6-old-locale-dev, libghc6-old-time-dev, 
libghc6-packedstring-dev, libghc6-pretty-dev, libghc6-process-dev, 
libghc6-random-dev, libghc6-readline-dev, libghc6-rts-dev, 
libghc6-template-haskell-dev, libghc6-unix-dev

In Ubuntu 8.10, there are 90 separate libghc6.*dev packages, which
ones do you think should be added to a GHC meta package?

-k
-- 
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


[Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread FFT
I'm still learning Haskell and also evaluating whether I want to use
the language in my work.

It seems like a fascinating language so far (although I don't know if
laziness will be a detriment later for me eventually), but I'm a bit
worried about the overall quality of its GHC implementation.

For example, I tried installing GHC-6.10.2 on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine
(probably the most mainstream Linux these days).

1st attempt: binary = failed the impossible happened, report bug (I
think it's already in bugzilla for an even earlier version)

2nd attempt: source and docs = followed README, but make failed
while building docs

3rd attempt: source only, no docs = make install succeeded, but ghci
now seems to have its readline screwed up (no editing, can't quit
even with Ctrl-C or Ctrl-D), while Ubuntu-bundled 6.8.* ghci works
fine in this regard.

If these kinds of issues are common only during installation, I can
live with that, but if GHC is flaky overall, having to deal with this
may cancel out whatever productivity advantages Haskell provides.

If the quality of the installation procedures is different from the
compiler itself, can you explain why?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread FFT
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:35 PM, John Dorsey hask...@colquitt.org wrote:

 Once it's installed and working, GHC's a very decent compiler.

My general null hypothesis is, as Alec Baldwin put it, that a loser is
a loser, or a buggy project is buggy.

If GHC is robust overall (which I'm yet to find out), why is the
installation so broken?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Peter Verswyvelen
That is strange, I'm using Ubuntu myself, and I come from Windows so know
absolutely nothing about Linux whatsoever, but GHC 6.10.2 binary installed
without problems.

But anyway, in this case, if you're on Windows, installation of GHC works
like a charm: download, install, play. But for most of the packages on
Hackage, Windows is not a good platform :)

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 10:19 PM, FFT fft1...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:35 PM, John Dorsey hask...@colquitt.org wrote:

  Once it's installed and working, GHC's a very decent compiler.

 My general null hypothesis is, as Alec Baldwin put it, that a loser is
 a loser, or a buggy project is buggy.

 If GHC is robust overall (which I'm yet to find out), why is the
 installation so broken?
 ___
 Haskell-Cafe mailing list
 Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
 http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Miguel Mitrofanov

What about 6.10.1? Is it failing too?

On 5 Apr 2009, at 22:22, FFT wrote:


I'm still learning Haskell and also evaluating whether I want to use
the language in my work.

It seems like a fascinating language so far (although I don't know if
laziness will be a detriment later for me eventually), but I'm a bit
worried about the overall quality of its GHC implementation.

For example, I tried installing GHC-6.10.2 on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine
(probably the most mainstream Linux these days).

1st attempt: binary = failed the impossible happened, report bug (I
think it's already in bugzilla for an even earlier version)

2nd attempt: source and docs = followed README, but make failed
while building docs

3rd attempt: source only, no docs = make install succeeded, but ghci
now seems to have its readline screwed up (no editing, can't quit
even with Ctrl-C or Ctrl-D), while Ubuntu-bundled 6.8.* ghci works
fine in this regard.

If these kinds of issues are common only during installation, I can
live with that, but if GHC is flaky overall, having to deal with this
may cancel out whatever productivity advantages Haskell provides.

If the quality of the installation procedures is different from the
compiler itself, can you explain why?
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread wren ng thornton

FFT wrote:

John Dorsey wrote:
 Once it's installed and working, GHC's a very decent compiler.

My general null hypothesis is, as Alec Baldwin put it, that a loser is
a loser, or a buggy project is buggy.

If GHC is robust overall (which I'm yet to find out), why is the
installation so broken?


Part of the problem is that GHC 6.6 is the last version that supported 
bootstrapping. Some of the changes in 6.8 broke that, and so the longer 
it goes the harder bootstrapping/installation becomes. It's a major bug 
that many people would like fixed; I don't know the details, but I'm 
sure the GHC mailing lists[1] or #ghc would have more to say about it. 
There are also some issues about libeditline which is used for the 
interactive debugger, and has a lot to do with Linux vs BSD nonsense.


Once these two issues are dealt with, the rest is smooth sailing. As the 
flagship Haskell compiler a lot of work has been invested in 
optimizations and the general running of GHC. Installation is less 
glorious work, so less academic and corporate investment has been paid 
to that part of things.


Since most of the community already has a GHC installed, the 
bootstrapping issue isn't devastating to those already in the loop. 
Consequently, a lot of work has been done on making the post-compiler 
development cycle more robust with projects like Cabal, Hackage, 
cabal-install, and the Haskell Platform. These projects are still under 
rapid development, but they are fairly stable and they make it very 
friendly to install libraries--- which greatly speeds up development.



[1] 
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/introduction-GHC.html#mailing-lists-GHC


--
Live well,
~wren
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread John Dorsey
Quoth FFT:
 My general null hypothesis is, as Alec Baldwin put it, that a loser is
 a loser, or a buggy project is buggy.

I can't see the world in such black and white terms.  GHC has strengths
and weaknesses, as do other projects.  GHC is changing over time, as are
other projects.

Formally verified software is still rare.  Most of the useful stuff lies
somewhere between buggy and bug-free.

 If GHC is robust overall (which I'm yet to find out), why is the
 installation so broken?

History.  Limited resources.  Complexity and diversity of target
environments.  Moving targets.  Day jobs.

Of course, you have to determine what your needs and standards are for
any product you use.

Regards,
John

___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Erik de Castro Lopo
FFT wrote:

 I'm still learning Haskell and also evaluating whether I want to use
 the language in my work.

 snip

 For example, I tried installing GHC-6.10.2 on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine
 (probably the most mainstream Linux these days).

I'm on Ubuntu 8.10 and soon to move to 9.04 and I agree that the
standard 6.8.2 compiler on Debian/Ubuntu is a PITA.

I haven't tried 6.10.2 yet, but the way I installed 6.10.1 and a bunch
of other packages was by installing them from the Debian unstable
source packages.

HTH,
Erik
-- 
--
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Jason Dagit
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo
mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
 FFT wrote:

 I'm still learning Haskell and also evaluating whether I want to use
 the language in my work.

  snip

 For example, I tried installing GHC-6.10.2 on my Ubuntu 8.04 machine
 (probably the most mainstream Linux these days).

 I'm on Ubuntu 8.10 and soon to move to 9.04 and I agree that the
 standard 6.8.2 compiler on Debian/Ubuntu is a PITA.

In particular, I advise my friends not to install GHC from apt on
Debian/Ubuntu because of the way the packages are fractured on those
distros.  Nothing but problems for casual Haskell hackers.  If you
know your distro and Haskell well, then sure it's easy to install all
the packages that constitute a normal ghc install.  For everyone else
it's just confusing and frustrating.  I've heard that from a distro
point of view the split packages are nice and that the solution to my
complaint is a proper meta or virtual package.

I wonder when we'll get a good haskell virtual package on Debian?

Just my $0.02,
Jason
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Erik de Castro Lopo
Jason Dagit wrote:

 In particular, I advise my friends not to install GHC from apt on
 Debian/Ubuntu because of the way the packages are fractured on those
 distros.

Fractured?

  Nothing but problems for casual Haskell hackers.  If you
 know your distro and Haskell well, then sure it's easy to install all
 the packages that constitute a normal ghc install.

Well I admit that having done a lot of debian packaging in my day job
I know the debian packaging system pretty well.

I chose to stick to the debian packages because I found cabal to be a
pain in the neck in comparison :-).

 I've heard that from a distro
 point of view the split packages are nice and that the solution to my
 complaint is a proper meta or virtual package.

My overwhelming complaint about the packages in Ubuntu and Debian
stable/testing is that they are for ghc-6.8.2.

 I wonder when we'll get a good haskell virtual package on Debian?

What would this package do?

Erik
-- 
--
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread FFT
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Peter Verswyvelen bugf...@gmail.com wrote:
 That is strange, I'm using Ubuntu myself, and I come from Windows so know
 absolutely nothing about Linux whatsoever, but GHC 6.10.2 binary installed
 without problems.

Are you running 32-bit Ubuntu 8.04 ?

/etc/lsb-release and /etc/issue* may contain this info, also
$ uname -a

It may also be the presence or absence of some packages that the
installation requires, but ./configure doesn't check.
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH

On 2009 Apr 5, at 19:47, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

Jason Dagit wrote:

I wonder when we'll get a good haskell virtual package on Debian?


What would this package do?



Install ghc + all the little pieces of libghc6-cruft needed to get a  
sane working environment?


--
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allb...@kf8nh.com
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allb...@ece.cmu.edu
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH




PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Richard O'Keefe


On 6 Apr 2009, at 1:05 pm, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:


On 2009 Apr 5, at 19:47, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:


What would this package do?



Install ghc + all the little pieces of libghc6-cruft needed to get a  
sane working environment?


I want the Zen package:  Make me one with everything.


___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] high probability of installation problems and quality of the glorious implementation

2009-04-05 Thread Jason Dagit
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo
mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
 Jason Dagit wrote:

 In particular, I advise my friends not to install GHC from apt on
 Debian/Ubuntu because of the way the packages are fractured on those
 distros.

 Fractured?

In the sense that they split up the things GHC builds.  Specifically,
you need to install quite a few packages to get everything that GHC
would come with.

  Nothing but problems for casual Haskell hackers.  If you
 know your distro and Haskell well, then sure it's easy to install all
 the packages that constitute a normal ghc install.

 Well I admit that having done a lot of debian packaging in my day job
 I know the debian packaging system pretty well.

Nice!  Debian is my favorite distro by leaps and bounds.

 I chose to stick to the debian packages because I found cabal to be a
 pain in the neck in comparison :-).

Interesting.  I'm glad that Open Source provides enough diversity that
people can use the tools they enjoy working with.  I like cabal just
fine but I'm glad we can both choose different paths to meet a common
goal.

 I wonder when we'll get a good haskell virtual package on Debian?

 What would this package do?

At a minimum it will give you everything that the GHC HQ installer
gives you.  For the casual haskell hacker, it ideally also gives you
the profiled versions of everything thath GHC HQ installer gives you.
Perhaps this is the Debian equivalent of the 'batteries included'
haskell platform.

Thanks,
Jason
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe