On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 01:55:40PM +, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>
> I get the error below on HEAD. Could something be wrong with the build
> system? I assume it's the SplitObjs=YES.
It sounded like something I might have broken yesterday, but turned out
to be something I broke some time ago
I wouldn't bother trying to build cabal with GHC HEAD if that's what
you're doing. You can just make cabal use a different GHC for
compilation, etc. If you have a built copy of GHC in some tree that
you want to test, you can actually make Cabal use it directly by just
saying:
$ cabal install -w ~/
I'm not sure if it completely solves your problem, but have you looked into
stow (http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/)? Using stow, you install an
application into a directory under ~/local/stow (using, say, ./configure
--prefix=…) and then the stow executable places symlinks to all of that
appli
I'm trying to set up a sandboxed installation of GHC HEAD with cabal-install
and some other
libraries. I need this to run some benchmarks on Repa library. Right now I'm
having problems with
bootstraping cabal-install. I managed to work around problems with some
pakcages like HTTP that
put upp
Ian
In a clean build with validate.mk set thus:
GhcStage1HcOpts += -DDEBUG
GhcLibHcOpts += -ticky -Wwarn
SplitObjs = YES
I get the error below on HEAD. Could something be wrong with the build system?
I assume it's the SplitObjs=YES.
Thanks
Simon
/usr/bin/find libraries/ghc-prim/dist-i
Yes, I asked Amos to put the ticket into Trac, so we don't forget to fix it.
Manuel
Simon Peyton-Jones :
> Manuel, is this something you might look at in due course?
>
> Simon
>
> | -Original Message-
> | From: ghc-tickets-boun...@haskell.org [mailto:ghc-tickets-
> | boun...@haskell.or
Manuel, is this something you might look at in due course?
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: ghc-tickets-boun...@haskell.org [mailto:ghc-tickets-
| boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of GHC
| Sent: 04 March 2013 00:17
| Cc: ghc-tick...@haskell.org
| Subject: [GHC] #7736: Parallel array enume
Ross
Excellent. We have moved forward nicely on the arrows front.
I have pushed the refactoring to typechecking arrows that we did together.
Remaining:
* You missed one test failure:
ghci/scripts T5045 [bad stderr] (ghci)
I'm sure that just looking at the source code will tell
