On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:37:37AM -0200, Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva wrote: > please take a look at the haskell-devscripts package [0] I've made.
Seems ok to me, as far as it goes. But the copyright holders (Arjan and John) should really be asked before changing debian/copyright (sorry for this remark if you did). Building haddock docs for all -doc packages seems overly generic. There are no haskell library source packages that build multiple -doc packages currently but there's no reason to prevent anyone from doing that. It should limit making haddock docs for only one if there are more -doc packages. You could have dropped all those checks for Cabal 1.2 out. Lenny has that and I doubt anyone would use this haskell-devscripts version for anything older than that. Why's dh_haskell_install parsing and substituting fields in installed-package-file? Those could have been already set via Cabal's configure option. Even so, IMHO, most of this seems like unnecessary work to me. The whole haskell-devscripts could be streamlined by switching over to hlibrary.mk. I think that dh_haskell_prep and dh_haskell_depends are the only ones of the set that do anything that would justify using perl. The rest are about generating new files and passing arguments to the Cabal build system and that's more of make's domain. What each of those 100+ lines long scripts do can be handled by a short (5 or so lines long) makefile rule. At least dh_haskell itself should be deprecated, as it makes ghc6 to be called as root. As an aside... Would anyone like to add a check to dh_haskell_prep and make it fail noisily if debian/control didn't have all the necessary haskell libraries listed as build dependencies? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-haskell-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
