Thanks, good to know; I'll read through 10.2 more carefully. I didn't think I'd need to cross-compile x86-linux to x86-linux.
You don't need to - the recommended way is to download a binary version. If you don't like using binary distributions, then use it for bootstrapping only, i.e. use it to build a ghc of your choice and then delete it again. This is just like what you usually do when you install gcc on your box for the first time.
Would it be unreasonable to include the unregisterised .hc files with a source distribution (or .hc files for "popular" platforms), so that a Haskell novice such as myself could do a "./configure && make && make install"? If configure detected no ghc, perhaps it could do the bootstrap automagically.
Well, the contents of the .hc files heavily depend on the results of ./configure - so unregistered .hc files still have to be tailor-made for the target platform.
As far as registerised .hc files for popular platforms go, I fail to see the point. In what way is bootstrapping from platform-specific .hc files superior to installing a binary (apart from the fact that it takes longer and looks cooler)? It would be like shipping GCC as a bunch of x86 .s files.
Cheers,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
