On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 15:22 +0200, Yitzchak Gale wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:
> >>> So in the next cabal-install release (which should be pretty soon now)
> >>> configure will do the same thing and pick base 3 unless you specify
> >>> build-depends base >= 4.
>
> Niklas Broberg wrote:
> >> I real
Duncan Coutts wrote:
>>> So in the next cabal-install release (which should be pretty soon now)
>>> configure will do the same thing and pick base 3 unless you specify
>>> build-depends base >= 4.
Niklas Broberg wrote:
>> I really really think this is the wrong way to go. Occasional
>> destruction
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 13:58 -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > So my plan is to make hackage require an upper bound on the version of
> > base for all new packages. That should avoid the need to use the
> > preferences hack the next time around.
>
> Hrm. I can see why you might do that, if you keep
Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 15:56 +0100, Niklas Broberg wrote:
>>> So in the next cabal-install release (which should be pretty soon now)
>>> configure will do the same thing and pick base 3 unless you specify
>>> build-depends base >= 4.
>> ... and so there will never be any incen
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 17:22 +0100, Niklas Broberg wrote:
> >> I really really think this is the wrong way to go. Occasional
> >> destruction is desperately needed for progress, else things will
> >> invariably stagnate.
> >
> > I disagree. Having everything fail (we measured it as ~90% of hackage)
>> I really really think this is the wrong way to go. Occasional
>> destruction is desperately needed for progress, else things will
>> invariably stagnate.
>
> I disagree. Having everything fail (we measured it as ~90% of hackage)
> when people upgraded to ghc-6.10 would have been a disaster. Do y
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 15:56 +0100, Niklas Broberg wrote:
> > So in the next cabal-install release (which should be pretty soon now)
> > configure will do the same thing and pick base 3 unless you specify
> > build-depends base >= 4.
>
> ... and so there will never be any incentive for these many p
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 15:56 +0100, Niklas Broberg wrote:
> > So in the next cabal-install release (which should be pretty soon now)
> > configure will do the same thing and pick base 3 unless you specify
> > build-depends base >= 4.
>
> ... and so there will never be any incentive for these many p
> So in the next cabal-install release (which should be pretty soon now)
> configure will do the same thing and pick base 3 unless you specify
> build-depends base >= 4.
... and so there will never be any incentive for these many packages
to migrate to base-4, which also has consequences for packa
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 18:31 -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> I can't hard-code base >= 4 into .cabal because that would break for
> GHC 6.8 users. I have CPP code that selects what to compile based on
> GHC version.
Ahh, but the version of base is no longer determined by the version of
GHC, so using
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 18:29 -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 03:50:30PM -0800, Michael Snoyman wrote:
> > >> [3 of 7] Compiling Database.HDBC.Statement ( Database/HDBC/Statement.hs,
> > >> dist/build/Database/HDBC/Statement.o )
> > >>
> > >> Database/HDBC/Statement.hs:113:9:
> >
Thank you John,
it worked like a charm :)
-- Valentyn.
On Jan 31, 2009, at 7:30 AM, John Goerzen wrote:
Niklas Broberg wrote:
Thanks for the hint for folks.
Why would cabal-install select a different base than running Setup
manually?
Someone thought it was a good idea to make base-3 the p
Niklas Broberg wrote:
>> Thanks for the hint for folks.
>>
>> Why would cabal-install select a different base than running Setup
>> manually?
>
> Someone thought it was a good idea to make base-3 the preferred
> selection for cabal-install, to make the transition from base-3 to
> base-4 as smooth
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 04:01, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 01:51:54AM +0100, Krzysztof Skrz??tnicki wrote:
> > The following change in .cabal file may solve the problems:---
> > flag base4
> > description: Choose base-4 if possible
> > default: True
> >
> > library
> > if
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 06:40:29PM -0600, Austin Seipp wrote:
> Excerpts from John Goerzen's message of Fri Jan 30 18:31:00 -0600 2009:
> > Why would cabal-install select a different base than running Setup
> > manually?
> >
> > I can't hard-code base >= 4 into .cabal because that would break fo
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 01:51:54AM +0100, Krzysztof Skrz??tnicki wrote:
> The following change in .cabal file may solve the problems:---
> flag base4
> description: Choose base-4 if possible
> default: True
>
> library
> if flag(splitBase)
> if flag(base4)
> Build-Depends: base>=4,
The following change in .cabal file may solve the problems:---
flag base4
description: Choose base-4 if possible
default: True
library
if flag(splitBase)
if flag(base4)
Build-Depends: base>=4, old-time, time, bytestring, containers,
old-locale
else
Build-Depends: base>=3,
> Thanks for the hint for folks.
>
> Why would cabal-install select a different base than running Setup
> manually?
Someone thought it was a good idea to make base-3 the preferred
selection for cabal-install, to make the transition from base-3 to
base-4 as smooth as possible. It may have worked fo
Excerpts from John Goerzen's message of Fri Jan 30 18:31:00 -0600 2009:
> Why would cabal-install select a different base than running Setup
> manually?
>
> I can't hard-code base >= 4 into .cabal because that would break for
> GHC 6.8 users. I have CPP code that selects what to compile based o
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 12:52:02AM +0100, Krzysztof Skrz??tnicki wrote:
> > I got the same error: Windows XP, GHC 6.10.1.
> > For some reason imported Control.Exception module appears to be 6.8.*
> > version.
> >
>
> I found a (temporary) fix: change dependancy in .cabal file to state "base
> >= 4
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 03:50:30PM -0800, Michael Snoyman wrote:
> >> [3 of 7] Compiling Database.HDBC.Statement ( Database/HDBC/Statement.hs,
> >> dist/build/Database/HDBC/Statement.o )
> >>
> >> Database/HDBC/Statement.hs:113:9:
> >>Type constructor `Exception' used as a class
> >>In the
Thanks, Krzysztof - it worked for me.
Something is definitely wrong with cabal dependencies: even when
HDBC-2.0.0 was installed, it tried to install it again (and failed)
when I tried to install HDBC-postgresql and HDBC-sqlite3.
Manual installation (./Setup configure; ./Setup build; ./Setup
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 00:45, Krzysztof Skrzętnicki wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 00:07, Valentyn Kamyshenko wrote:
>
>> Hello John,
>>
>> I'm trying to install the new version of HDBC on my Mac (ghc version is
>> 6.10.1), and get the following error:
>>
>> # cabal upgrade --global
>> Resolvin
2009/1/30 Krzysztof Skrzętnicki
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 00:07, Valentyn Kamyshenko wrote:
>
>> Hello John,
>>
>> I'm trying to install the new version of HDBC on my Mac (ghc version is
>> 6.10.1), and get the following error:
>>
>> # cabal upgrade --global
>> Resolving dependencies...
>> 'HDBC-
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 00:07, Valentyn Kamyshenko wrote:
> Hello John,
>
> I'm trying to install the new version of HDBC on my Mac (ghc version is
> 6.10.1), and get the following error:
>
> # cabal upgrade --global
> Resolving dependencies...
> 'HDBC-2.0.0' is cached.
> Configuring HDBC-2.0.0...
Hello John,
I'm trying to install the new version of HDBC on my Mac (ghc version
is 6.10.1), and get the following error:
# cabal upgrade --global
Resolving dependencies...
'HDBC-2.0.0' is cached.
Configuring HDBC-2.0.0...
Preprocessing library HDBC-2.0.0...
Preprocessing executables for HDBC
Hi everyone,
I'm pleased to announce that HDBC v2.0 is now available.
Simultaneously, HDBC-sqlite3, HDBC-postgresql, and HDBC-odbc v2.0 have
also been uploaded. All may be found from Hackage, or at
software.complete.org.
A guide to new features and migration can be found at:
http://software.c
27 matches
Mail list logo
