From: Duncan C. <dun...@wo...> - 2005-04-21 16:37:09
|
All, So I changed the way signals are implemented recently and it turns out that this tickles a bug in GHCi. GHCi does not link to the symobls in the rts so the package fails to load. SimonM has confirmed that this is a bug and has been fixed upstream and will be in GHC 6.4.1. So the question is do we leave it at that or do we use the old style for versions of ghc prior to GHC 6.4.1 ? How important is GHCi support? Duncan |
From: Axel S. <A....@ke...> - 2005-04-21 18:28:24
|
On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 16:03 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > All, > > So I changed the way signals are implemented recently and it turns out > that this tickles a bug in GHCi. GHCi does not link to the symobls in > the rts so the package fails to load. SimonM has confirmed that this is > a bug and has been fixed upstream and will be in GHC 6.4.1. > > So the question is do we leave it at that or do we use the old style for > versions of ghc prior to GHC 6.4.1 ? How important is GHCi support? Leave it! ghc 6.4 is kinda inherently broken. Our Cabal install doesn't work properly either, or does it? Axel. |
From: Duncan C. <dun...@wo...> - 2005-04-22 20:35:36
|
On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 19:27 +0100, Axel Simon wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 16:03 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > > All, > > > > So I changed the way signals are implemented recently and it turns out > > that this tickles a bug in GHCi. GHCi does not link to the symobls in > > the rts so the package fails to load. SimonM has confirmed that this is > > a bug and has been fixed upstream and will be in GHC 6.4.1. > > > > So the question is do we leave it at that or do we use the old style for > > versions of ghc prior to GHC 6.4.1 ? How important is GHCi support? > > > Leave it! ghc 6.4 is kinda inherently broken. Sorry, I wasn't very specific. It doesn't work for ghc 6.4 or any eariler version, though it will work with 6.4.1 (Simon claims). Does that change the answer? :-) > Our Cabal install doesn't work properly either, or does it? It does, it works fine. :-) Duncan |
From: Axel S. <A....@ke...> - 2005-04-23 13:09:22
|
On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 21:26 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 19:27 +0100, Axel Simon wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 16:03 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > > > All, > > > > > > So I changed the way signals are implemented recently and it turns out > > > that this tickles a bug in GHCi. GHCi does not link to the symobls in > > > the rts so the package fails to load. SimonM has confirmed that this is > > > a bug and has been fixed upstream and will be in GHC 6.4.1. > > > > > > So the question is do we leave it at that or do we use the old style for > > > versions of ghc prior to GHC 6.4.1 ? How important is GHCi support? > > > > > > Leave it! ghc 6.4 is kinda inherently broken. > > Sorry, I wasn't very specific. It doesn't work for ghc 6.4 or any > eariler version, though it will work with 6.4.1 (Simon claims). > > Does that change the answer? :-) ghci or ghc? If it's ghci only (and I think it is, but I don't know if I've ever run the demos) then we could refer people to use the current gtk2hs if they need ghci. It was broken for some other versions before, too. If the current version works with the ghc's between 5.0X and 6.X than that's quite alright IMHO. > > Our Cabal install doesn't work properly either, or does it? > > It does, it works fine. :-) Ok, then I'll try an install. Axel. |
From: Duncan C. <dun...@wo...> - 2005-04-23 18:27:18
|
On Sat, 2005-04-23 at 14:08 +0100, Axel Simon wrote: > > > Leave it! ghc 6.4 is kinda inherently broken. > > > > Sorry, I wasn't very specific. It doesn't work for ghc 6.4 or any > > eariler version, though it will work with 6.4.1 (Simon claims). > > > > Does that change the answer? :-) > > ghci or ghc? GHCi. The new scheme does not work with any released version of GHCi. It should however work with all released versions of GHC back as far as 5.04.x > If it's ghci only (and I think it is, but I don't know if > I've ever run the demos) then we could refer people to use the current > gtk2hs if they need ghci. It was broken for some other versions before, > too. If the current version works with the ghc's between 5.0X and 6.X > than that's quite alright IMHO. Ok, I won't make it configurable which signals system is used then. And we can just mention it in the release notes. Duncan |