Páli Gábor János <pali.ga...@gmail.com> writes: > 2016-05-14 13:06 GMT+02:00 Karel Gardas <karel.gar...@centrum.cz>: >> On 05/14/16 11:28 AM, Ben Gamari wrote: >>> The pragmatist in me wants to answer 1) yes, 2) no, although I do >>> dislike the idea of distributing binaries that weren't derived from the >>> associated source tarball. >> >> I guess all other Linuxes naturally use gnu >> make as `make' and Windows in msys too so only non-GNU/non-Linux >> systems should be affected and from those only FreeBSD has caught this. > > Yes, that is possible. I do not know either Solaris or OpenBSD well > enough, but I suspect they might have GNU make(1) installed in their > paths as `make` or their default make(1) can understand GNU-style > Makefiles. FreeBSD has BSD make(1), which is the default, and this > cannot comprehend the GNU-style files at all. > > Anyhow, in my humble opinion, it is a bad practice the hardwire the > name of the make tool in the sources. > Indeed, this was my mistake. I'll try to be more careful of this in the future.
>> If this is >> true, then I would recommend "no" to both points and leave the fix in 8.0 >> branch for 8.0.2... > > Well, in theory, FreeBSD is still a Tier-1 platform, so every release > should just build fine without any further efforts. I am also aware > of the fact I am considered a minority here, and that this is just a > minor technical problem that could wait for some undetermined time. > However, personally, I would be quite disappointed if this promise was > broken. > Yes, you are right. FreeBSD is tier-1 and we have committed to ensure these work out-of-the-box. I had neglected to consider this in my previous assessment of the situation. In light of this I think we have little choice but to throw out these binaries and re-spin. Thankfully I have held off on pushing the tag until the last possible moment. I think at the moment we should include the following in the new release, * the haddock $(MAKE) fix * the patch vendorising the alabaster theme for haddock's documentation * the patch fixing the clean rule for haddock's documentation * the patch ensuring haddock documentation is built for ghc's `all` target * D2224, which splits ghc-boot to avoid unnecessary transitive dependencies in template-haskell (which otherwise would have necessitated a prompt 8.0.2 release) * A small fix for PPC which fixes crashes in threaded programs In the interest of risk minimization I think that is all we should merge. > I am sorry and apologize that I found this bug after the release was > tagged, but I did not have the chance to test it before it was > considered a final release. No need to apologize; I'm glad you brought up the issue. The release will go out when it's ready. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs