Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

Bjorn Buckwalter writes: > So what would be the fix, to set an upper bound on base? The fix is to have the maintainer check whether or not the package builds with base-4 (you can do this the old manual way using runhaskell Setup.hs). If it does, then specify that it does so, e.g.: base < 5 T

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

Am Montag 26 April 2010 14:32:03 schrieb Bjorn Buckwalter: > > So what would be the fix, to set an upper bound on base? Is the > general recommendation that all packages should specify upper bounds > on all dependencies (if so why doesn't Cabal tell us?)? Yes, that's the general recommendation. (u

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 20:07, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: > Bjorn Buckwalter writes: > >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 19:38, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic >> wrote: >>> Bjorn Buckwalter writes: Why does cabal seem to prefer base-3.0.3.2 over base-4.2.0.0 when installing packages with an unquali

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

Bjorn Buckwalter writes: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 19:38, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic > wrote: >> Bjorn Buckwalter writes: >>> Why does cabal seem to prefer base-3.0.3.2 over base-4.2.0.0 when >>> installing packages with an unqualified base requirement? Example: >> >> [snip] >> >> The reason that ba

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 19:38, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: > Bjorn Buckwalter writes: >> Why does cabal seem to prefer base-3.0.3.2 over base-4.2.0.0 when >> installing packages with an unqualified base requirement? Example: > > You mean cabal-install rather than Cabal.  The reason that base-3 i

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

Bjorn Buckwalter writes: > Why does cabal seem to prefer base-3.0.3.2 over base-4.2.0.0 when > installing packages with an unqualified base requirement? Example: You mean cabal-install rather than Cabal. The reason that base-3 is chosen is because many of these old libraries won't build with bas

[Haskell-cafe] Why does cabal select base-3.0.3.2 when base-4.2.0.0 is available?

Dear all, Why does cabal seem to prefer base-3.0.3.2 over base-4.2.0.0 when installing packages with an unqualified base requirement? Example: $ cabal install -v fad --reinstall [snip] Resolving dependencies... selecting fad-1.0 (hackage) selecting base-3.0.3.2 (installed) and 4.2.0.0 (installed