Bjorn Bringert wrote: > The tar package uses System.PosixCompat from the unix-compat package > to also work under non-posix systems (read Windows). This dependency > is listed in the tar.cabal file (see http://hackage.haskell.org/ > packages/archive/tar/0.1/tar.cabal). System.Posix was never renamed. > [...] > Why not just install unix-compat? It is listed as a dependency after > all.
Actually Windows claims to be a Posix system, too (not that I really believe it or care much). Iirc, unix-compat blew up on GHC 6.4, too, again by picking up the wrong Cabal. I'll check this again tomorrow (don't have access to that machine right now). Anyway, I don't see why something that provides the same functionality as something else needs a different name. With the mechanism of something like apt (Provides, Conflicts, Replaces, ...) I'd have no problem, but Cabal doesn't do that stuff. Maybe it should, though. > I seem to be able to build the tar package against binary-0.3. What > exactly is the error that you are getting? No "instance MonadFix Get" (from memory, I can check this again once I calm down...) > By the way, I don't think that users of open source software have a > right to be pissed off, or at least authors don't have an obligation > to care about them being pissed off. What users do have is a right to > submit patches. No sir, I always have a right to be pissed off. What I don't have is a right to demand anything from you. The problem with patches is how do you patch something as thoroughly messed up as 'base-2.0' vs. 'base-2.1' vs. 'base-2.1.1'? If I saw a way to fix it, you'd already have a patch, but all I have right now is a GHC with an afroengineered package configuration and a mutilated tar package... > That said, I agree that the constantly changing packages make it hard > to keep dependencies up to date. Moreover, the conical place to find packages is Hackage, right? Tar is there, unix-compat is and binary is, too. But bytestring is missing. Which means you have to hunt down bytestring separately, and cabal-get will fail, too. It also means that some of these packages cannot work on any released version of GHC. > I guess that this is price we pay for moving quickly. Is it impossible to move quickly on GHC 6.4? -Udo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell