Bug#348633: ghc6: effective FTBFS because of a bug in /usr/bin/make

2006-03-04 Thread Jurij Smakov
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Ian Lynagh wrote: The relevant bits are below; the complete thing is at http://musketeer.comlab.ox.ac.uk/~igloo/ghc6_6.4.1-2.diff.gz With this patch and using ghc6 6.4-4.1 to satisfy the build-dep, I was able to successfully built ghc6 6.4.1-2 on my sparc machine. I have

Bug#348633: ghc6: effective FTBFS because of a bug in /usr/bin/make

2006-03-01 Thread Ian Lynagh
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 07:45:45PM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote: On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Ian Lynagh wrote: Over the weekend I confirmed that removing the .SECONDARY: fixed the problem, at the slight expense of make being less convenient while doing development. I've checked it works OK on x86, and

Bug#348633: ghc6: effective FTBFS because of a bug in /usr/bin/make

2006-02-27 Thread Jurij Smakov
Hi, As it appears that upstream is reluctant to consider it a bug in make (see 346248 for discussion), I started playing with ghc6 build system in an attempt to come up with a workaround. I was able to build it in under 3.5 hours on a 1.7GHz Pentium IV machine with the attached patch. For

Bug#348633: ghc6: effective FTBFS because of a bug in /usr/bin/make

2006-02-27 Thread Ian Lynagh
Hi Jurij, On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 09:40:49AM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote: As it appears that upstream is reluctant to consider it a bug in make (see 346248 for discussion), I started playing with ghc6 build system in an attempt to come up with a workaround. I was able to build it in under

Bug#348633: ghc6: effective FTBFS because of a bug in /usr/bin/make

2006-02-27 Thread Jurij Smakov
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Ian Lynagh wrote: Over the weekend I confirmed that removing the .SECONDARY: fixed the problem, at the slight expense of make being less convenient while doing development. I've checked it works OK on x86, and have left vore to churn at it. Cool. Can you post a patch