On Thursday 15 March 2007 17:57, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> The only reason ghc does not ship by default with cpphs is ideological -
> the latter is GPL licensed.  Of course, 3rd-party packagers (RPM,
> debian, etc) have the liberty to include cpphs anyway, and modify ghc's
> driver script accordingly.
>
> (It does seem curious that, in avoiding the distribution of cpphs, ghc
> on Windows instead distributes gcc, which is also GPLed :-)

OK, now I remember. :-) Hmmm, that seems to indicate that splitting off at 
least cpphs from the Hugs/nhc98 distributions is the right way. And because 
of a similar reasoning, hsc2hs should not be distributed with nhc98.

IIRC, GHC has a slightly modified hsc2hs copy in its source tree. What were 
the reasons for this duplication of 
http://darcs.haskell.org:/home/darcs/hsc2hs? Shall we remove the hsc2hs from 
GHC's source tree and make hsc2hs a build requirement for people building 
from darcs? Although this would introduce one more dependency, this seems to 
be cleaner, and the hsc2hs stuff could be removed from Hugs/nhc98, too. We 
don't ship the sources of sed, perl etc., either... ;-)

Cheers,
   S.

_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc

Reply via email to