Hello,
I have recently been reading the source code of Cabal. I found
the index command and I found this thread. However, when I run a
recent Cabal, it seems the index command is not available:
:; /Library/Haskell/ghc-7.4.2/lib/cabal-install-1.16.0.2/bin/cabal index
cabal: unrecognised command
On 29 May 2011 19:46, Antoine Latter wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Duncan Coutts
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 11:16 -0600, Antoine Latter wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm not sure I really understand the difference. Whether there is a
>> difference in content/meaning or just a difference in t
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Duncan Coutts
wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 11:16 -0600, Antoine Latter wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I really understand the difference. Whether there is a
> difference in content/meaning or just a difference in the format.
>
Oh my, what an old thread. I'll try an r
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 11:16 -0600, Antoine Latter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Duncan Coutts
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 12:27 +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> >
> >> Matt and I also discussed making the 00-index.tar.gz into a RESTful
> >> format by adding proper URLs for package
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:06:26AM +0100, Tillmann Rendel wrote:
> (I was not aware that NFTS supports symlinks, though. How would I access
> this feature on a Windows machine?)
mklink, which exposes a functionality that encompasses both symlinks,
hardlinks, junctions (which are kind of a rebind
Hi,
Matthew Gruen wrote:
How would this interact with the absence of symlinks on Windows?
Since the index tarball is never unpacked on the client's filesystem,
only cabal needs to know about it, and it is backwards/forwards
compatible.
What's the benefit of using a tarball then, if some deve
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:46 +, Ross Paterson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:46:33PM -0600, Antoine Latter wrote:
> > The index tar-ball on Hackage has an odd naming convention. Package
> > descriptions are given paths of the form:
> >
> > ./$pkg/$version/$pkg.cabal
> >
> > including the
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 14:44 +0100, Tillmann Rendel wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > [...] symlinks [...]
> >
> > Opinions?
>
> How would this interact with the absence of symlinks on Windows?
Not a problem at all. The index tarballs are never unpacked to files on
disk. We read the tar file direc
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Duncan Coutts
wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 12:27 +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
>
>> Matt and I also discussed making the 00-index.tar.gz into a RESTful
>> format by adding proper URLs for package tarballs.
>
> Indeed we could go further and use a single general for
--- don't think the message made it to cabal-devel, forwarding, sorry
if you get it twice ---
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Tillmann Rendel
wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:
>>
>> [...] symlinks [...]
>>
>> Opinions?
>
> How would this interact with the absence of symlinks on Windows?
>
> Tillman
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 02:44:39PM +0100, Tillmann Rendel wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:
>> [...] symlinks [...]
>
> How would this interact with the absence of symlinks on Windows?
Note that NTFS has supported all kinds of links, sym- and hard-, since
Vista and up, so I guess you're referring to e
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:46:33PM -0600, Antoine Latter wrote:
> The index tar-ball on Hackage has an odd naming convention. Package
> descriptions are given paths of the form:
>
> ./$pkg/$version/$pkg.cabal
>
> including the leading "./".
> I'm guessing that this is done as a method of distingu
Duncan Coutts wrote:
[...] symlinks [...]
Opinions?
How would this interact with the absence of symlinks on Windows?
Tillmann
___
cabal-devel mailing list
cabal-devel@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 12:27 +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> Matt and I also discussed making the 00-index.tar.gz into a RESTful
> format by adding proper URLs for package tarballs.
Indeed we could go further and use a single general format for
describing or distributing bundles of packages.
Use ca
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 19:46 -0600, Antoine Latter wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> The index tar-ball on Hackage has an odd naming convention. Package
> descriptions are given paths of the form:
>
> ./$pkg/$version/$pkg.cabal
>
> including the leading "./".
> I'm guessing that this is done as a method of
Hi folks,
The index tar-ball on Hackage has an odd naming convention. Package
descriptions are given paths of the form:
./$pkg/$version/$pkg.cabal
including the leading "./".
I'm guessing that this is done as a method of distinguishing
non-package meta-data.
Is this a convention we need to pres
16 matches
Mail list logo
