On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 08:55:28AM +0100, Sven Panne wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 7. Dezember 2006 11:37 schrieb Christian Maeder:
> > The archive
> > http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/6.6/ghc-6.6-src-extralibs.tar.bz2
> > does not contain the files ControlPoint.hs and Domain.hs from directory
> > libraries/OpenGL/Graphics/Rendering/OpenGL/GL/
>
> If I see things correctly, the 6.6 extralibs contain the version 2.1 of the
> OpenGL package, i.e. the stuff currently in
> http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/unstable/OpenGL/, at least I hope so. :-/
>
> > These files are listed by the binary distribution
> > http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/6.6/ghc-6.6-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2
This will probably have been made with whatever OpenGL was in darcs when
the build was done (the binary distributions come from the nightly
builds).
The extralibs are not part of the GHC release, they are just sometimes
bundled to make users' lives easier, so the GHC release is not tied to
any particular version of the extralibs.
> To be honest, I don't fully understand the workflow for building the
> "official" GHC distributions currently. In former times, the whole tree,
> including libraries, had a CVS tag, so things were crystal-clear.
GHC and the core libraries all have a "6.6 release" tag.
One problem we do have is that if you get a library (core, extralibs or
otherwise) from darcs on two different days then you might get two
different libraries with the same version number. We should possibly do
something like having only odd second components (e.g. version 2.3 but
not version 2.4) in darcs repos so we can at least spot these unstable
version numbers. Then to do a release you'd push the three patches
Version=2.4; tag 2.4; Version=2.5
all at once.
Thanks
Ian
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
