RE: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage Build Failures

2008-10-04 Thread Henning Thielemann
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Mitchell, Neil wrote: The error comes from using QuickCheck 2, which happens to also use the operator (><). I can see two ways to solve the problem: (1) Add "< 2" after "QuickCheck" in the Wired.cabal file. (2) Add "hiding ((><))" after "import Test.QuickCheck" in Data/H

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage Build Failures

2008-10-01 Thread Emil Axelsson
Stephan Friedrichs skrev: Emil Axelsson wrote: [...] The error comes from using QuickCheck 2, which happens to also use the operator (><). I can see two ways to solve the problem: (1) Add "< 2" after "QuickCheck" in the Wired.cabal file. (2) Add "hiding ((><))" after "import Test.QuickCheck

RE: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage Build Failures

2008-10-01 Thread Mitchell, Neil
> > The error comes from using QuickCheck 2, which happens to > also use the > > operator (><). I can see two ways to solve the problem: > > > > (1) Add "< 2" after "QuickCheck" in the Wired.cabal file. > > > > (2) Add "hiding ((><))" after "import Test.QuickCheck" in > > Data/Hardware/Interna

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage Build Failures

2008-10-01 Thread Stephan Friedrichs
Emil Axelsson wrote: [...] The error comes from using QuickCheck 2, which happens to also use the operator (><). I can see two ways to solve the problem: (1) Add "< 2" after "QuickCheck" in the Wired.cabal file. (2) Add "hiding ((><))" after "import Test.QuickCheck" in Data/Hardware/Interna

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage Build Failures

2008-10-01 Thread Emil Axelsson
Hi Cetin! Glad to see at least one person trying my package :) The error comes from using QuickCheck 2, which happens to also use the operator (><). I can see two ways to solve the problem: (1) Add "< 2" after "QuickCheck" in the Wired.cabal file. (2) Add "hiding ((><))" after "import Test.Q

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hackage Build Failures

2008-09-30 Thread Duncan Coutts
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 03:04 +0200, Cetin Sert wrote: > Hi, > > what is the best action to take if a package from hackage fails to > build? Is there a recommended/established common way to deal with > build failures/runtime bugs etc.? Most packages specify a maintainer which is conventionally an e