Re: Relocatable dist

Hi, right now I’d like to compare the compiler at my feature branch with and without the last commit on that branch. I have a working copy at the end of my feature branch. If the worktree was relocatable, I could now simply `cp -r` the whole worktree, pop the top commit, run `make -C ghc 2` and

Re: Bringing back #ghc IRC logging

Just the other day, someone said logging *did* work again... and indeed, it seems like it does: http://ircbrowse.net/browse/ghc?id=202340=1508883548#t1508883548 Cheers, Moritz > On Oct 25, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Ben Gamari wrote: > > Niklas Hambüchen writes: >

Re: Bringing back #ghc IRC logging

Niklas Hambüchen writes: > Hey Ben, > > I haven't heard of a single concern of enabling botbot.me over the last > 3 months. > > Can we go ahead and enable it? > > All we need is a channel op to fill out https://botbot.me/request/. > Yep, let's do it. Thanks for following up on this!

Re: Relocatable dist

Hi, just to elaborate a bit. We *can* build cross compiler, and cross compile ghc with the current make based build system. I'm not certain how well packaging binary distributions of cross compiled ghc's work. I've only run into several when trying to build binary distributions for cross

Re: perf.haskell.org functional again

> Am 24.10.2017 um 14:46 schrieb Joachim Breitner >: > > Is CircleCI the future now? Yes, as per https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ContinuousIntegration > In

Re: Relocatable dist

That doesn’t mean it can’t be used for cross-compilation once it is in the tree. > Am 25.10.2017 um 11:06 schrieb Brandon Allbery : > > Discussion I've been seeing is Hadrian will not be ready for production use > for 8.4. Pulling it in tree is scheduled for 8.4 mostly to

Re: Relocatable dist

Discussion I've been seeing is Hadrian will not be ready for production use for 8.4. Pulling it in tree is scheduled for 8.4 mostly to make it easier to keep up to date with other changes and to make it easier to work on and test the various missing pieces: as I understand it, Hadrian can't yet

Re: Relocatable dist

> Am 24.10.2017 um 20:02 schrieb Moritz Angermann : > > Hi *, > > so I've given this a stab[1]. While getting the wrapper requirement, > and the .conf files sorted was rather easy. (We already have > getExecutablePath, > and the relocatable logic for windows. As

Re: Relocatable dist

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Moritz Angermann < moritz.angerm...@gmail.com> wrote: > However, I am now again at the point where I start hacking on the build > system, while Hadrian is imminent. And this is quite depressing > Realistically, while Hadrian going into the tree may be imminent,

Simplify.hs depends on typechecker

Hi, while rebuilding Simplify.o only I noticed that all of the type checker, and HsSyn stuff, and renamer stuff, and so needed to be rebuilt, which I found strange. After a little investigation, it seems that the simplifier depends on CoreMonad, and that pulls some very few type-checker related

Re: perf.haskell.org functional again

Hi Joachim, > But that’s what I am saying: By measuring dynamic instructions (using > cachegrind), the execution time is no longer relevant. I'm skeptical that this metric is a reliable enough proxy for actual runtime of user programs to make tracking it and only it sufficient. For the reasons

Re: Relocatable dist

Hi *, so I've given this a stab[1]. While getting the wrapper requirement, and the .conf files sorted was rather easy. (We already have getExecutablePath, and the relocatable logic for windows. As well as $topdir and ${pkgroot} support for paths in .conf files.) Now as Manuel laid out the