On Dec 17, 2007 5:58 PM, Manuel M T Chakravarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ian Lynagh: > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 12:53:32PM +1100, Manuel M T Chakravarty > > wrote: > > > >> Actually, I think, we should use the gmp/ in the ghc repo by default > > > > If you want to use it when building a bindist that might be used on > > other computers you shold be able to set > > HaveLibGmp = NO > > HaveFrameworkGMP = NO > > in mk/build.mk, although I'm not sure I've ever tried it. > > > > The disadvantages of using it are it might be out of date (we had some > > Windows segfaults a while ago that were fixed by updating the in-tree > > gmp) and wasted space. > > Sure we waste some space, but the alternative is worse. Programs > compiled with GHC will essentially not run on any computer, but the > one where they were compiled. For example, the number of Macs with > gmp installed is minuscule. The default should be to build programs > that run everywhere with minimal hassle (not programs that save some > space, but are unusable on most computers).
My understanding was that one major reason to dynamically link against GMP is to satisfy the LGPL, not just to save disk space. I found a couple old but relevant posts by Wolfgang Thaller, who originally created HaskellSupport.framework (now GMP.framework): http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2002-June/003494.html http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/cvs-ghc/2005-March/023769.html The gist of those posts is the following: - Statically linking against GMP puts extra license requirements on any ghc-compiled program; thus, dynamic linking is preferable. - On OS X, installing new frameworks is very easy (just drag-and-drop the framework into ~/Library/Frameworks or /Library/Frameworks; the former doesn't even need admin privileges). This doesn't seem like much to ask of users. Best, -Judah _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users