I'll set up a wikipage this evening. Should we get a mailing list of our own too, or do you think it's best to continue on ghc-devs@?
-- Gintautas Miliauskas On Oct 9, 2014 9:52 AM, "Simon Peyton Jones" <simo...@microsoft.com> wrote: > I think I’m fairly behind on the current build process of GHC, but as I > do use GHC mainly on Windows, at such a time as you would like to move on > to other things, I would certainly throw my hat In the ring. > > > > That sounds helpful, thank you. > > > Are we at the point where we could form a GHC-on-Windows Task Force? With > its own wiki page on the GHC Trac, and with named participants. (Of course > you can drop off again.) But it would be really helpful to have an > explicit group who feels a sense of ownership about making sure GHC works > well on Windows. At the moment we are reduced to folk memory “I recall > that Gintautas did something like that a few months ago”. > > > It sounds as if Tamar would be a willing member. Would anyone else be > willing? I’d say that being a member indicates a positive willingness to > help others, along with some level of expertise, NOT a promise to drop > everything to attend to someone else’s problem. > > > > Simon > > > > *From:* loneti...@gmail.com [mailto:loneti...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* 09 October 2014 06:04 > *To:* Gintautas Miliauskas; Simon Peyton Jones > *Cc:* Randy Polen; kyra; Marek Wawrzos; Roman Kuznetsov; Neil Mitchell; > ghc-devs@haskell.org > *Subject:* Re: Building ghc on Windows with msys2 > > > > Hi Gintautas, > > > > > Indeed, the next thing I was going to ask was about expediting the > decision process. I would be happy to try and coordinate a push in Windows > matters. There is a caveat though: I don't have any skin in the > GHC-on-Windows game, so I will want to move on to other things afterwards. > > > > I think I’m fairly behind on the current build process of GHC, but as I do > use GHC mainly on Windows, at such a time as you would like to move on to > other things, I would certainly throw my hat In the ring. > > > > Cheers, > > Tamar > > > > > > *From:* Gintautas Miliauskas <gintautas.miliaus...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, October 2, 2014 22:32 > *To:* Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com> > *Cc:* Randy Polen <randyhask...@outlook.com>, kyra <ky...@mail.ru>, Marek > Wawrzos <marek.28...@gmail.com>, Tamar Christina <loneti...@gmail.com>, Roman > Kuznetsov <kuzn...@hotmail.com>, Neil Mitchell <ndmitch...@gmail.com>, > ghc-devs@haskell.org > > > > Hi, > > > > > All we need is someone to act as convenor/coordinator and we are good to > go. Would any of you be willing to play that role? > > > > Indeed, the next thing I was going to ask was about expediting the > decision process. I would be happy to try and coordinate a push in Windows > matters. There is a caveat though: I don't have any skin in the > GHC-on-Windows game, so I will want to move on to other things afterwards. > > > > An advantage of having a working group is that you can *decide* things. > At the moment people often wait for GHC HQ to make a decision, and end up > waiting a long time. It would be better if a working group was responsible > for the GHC-on-Windows build and then if (say) you want to mandate msys2, > you can go ahead and mandate it. Well, obviously consult ghc-devs for > advice, but you are in the lead. Does that make sense? > > > > Sounds great. The question still remains about making changes to code: is > there a particular person with commit rights that we could lean on for code > reviews and committing changes to the main repository? > > > > I think an early task is to replace what Neil Mitchell encountered: FIVE > different wiki pages describing how to build GHC on Windows. We want just > one! (Others can perhaps be marked “out of date/archive” rather than > deleted, but it should be clear which is the main choice.) > > > > Indeed, it's a bit of a mess. I intended to shape up the msys2 page to > serve as the default, but wanted to see more testing done before before > dropping the other pages. > > > > I agree with using msys2 as the main choice. (I’m using it myself.) It > may be that Gintautas’s page > https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Building/Preparation/Windows/MSYS2 > is already sufficient. Although I’d like to see it tested by others. For > example, I found that it was CRUCIAL to set MSYSYSTEM=MINGW whereas > Gintautas’s page says nothing about that. > > > > Are you sure that is a problem? The page specifically instructs to use the > msys64_shell.bat script (through a shortcut) that is included in msys2, and > that script takes care of setting MSYSTEM=MINGW64, among other important > things. > > > > Other small thoughts: > > · We started including the ghc-tarball stuff because when we > relied directly on the gcc that came with msys, we kept getting build > failures because the gcc that some random person happened to be using did > not work (e..g. they had a too-old or too-new version of msys). By using a > single, fixed gcc, we avoided all this pain. > > > > Makes sense. Just curious: why is this less of a problem on GNU/Linux > distros compared to msys2? Does msys2 see comparatively less testing, or is > it generally more bleeding edge? > > > > · I don’t know what a “rubenvb” build is, but I think you can go > ahead and say “use X and Y in this way”. The important thing is that it > should be reproducible, and not dependent on the particular Cygwin or gcc > or whatever the that user happens to have installed. > > A "rubenvb" build is one of the available types of prebuilt binary > packages of mingw for Windows. Let's figure out if there is something more > mainstream and if we can migrate to that. > > > > -- > Gintautas Miliauskas >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs