On 27 April 2015 at 10:24, SP <s...@orbitalfox.com> wrote: > On 24/04/15 16:11, Magnus Therning wrote: >> The only solution I can see is to do something clever in the >> ghc.install (`pre_upgrade` and `post_upgrade`). I'm not sure exactly >> what information is available though. One would probably need enough >> information to distinguish a re-install from an upgrade. > > It think that for the sake of integrity this should happen. Not saying > it is a critical bug which needs any immediate attention. Maybe > something we can open a low priority issue for and fix when the > opportunity arises. > >> Also, I'm still not clear on *why* `pacman` all of a sudden >> decides to re-install ghc on your system. > > I think given that it is a possibility, the package should cater for it. > One may have wanted to install Ghc again for various reasons.
What reasons would that be? >> If you figure out why, then that might very well be a more natural >> place to fix the issue than inside the ghc package. > > I mentioned it in a previous email. I told packman to install > `haskell-base` because the Setup complained `base` was missing. Yes, I understand that, but *why* did it go missing. Somewhere during the installation of haskell packages your ghc package database was changed (corrupted?) in such a way that ghc lost records of `base`. I'd really like to know why. /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: mag...@therning.org jabber: mag...@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus _______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
