I have several libraries on hackage that depend on wxhaskell. Because wxhaskell is not itself on hackage, my libraries won't compile and won't haddock there. I'd really like to have cross-library haddocks all working.
Is Cabal for wxhaskell in the works? Are there roadblocks?
If Ross could build wxhaskell (both libs and docs) on the Linux machine that hosts hackage, then he could hack around lack of Cabal building. But he's having trouble.
What version of wxhaskell is recommended for Linux? Does it build successfully? Is there anyone who would help Ross through the process?
Thanks, - Conal
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 10:25:30AM -0800, Conal Elliott wrote:
It seems from the sourceforge page that someone is moving on wxhaskell> Some of my packages use wxhaskell, which is not on hackage. That means
> those libs fail to compile *and* to produce haddock docs on hackage.
> I love the idea of people browsing through lib docs, following links
> from one lib to another to another. And I don't know how to get there.
> Any ideas? Perhaps one improvement would be to run haddock even when
> compiling fails -- assuming there's a place on hackage to deposit the
> .haddock files or a way to find them off of hackage. Or, maybe rely on
> folks to make sure all of their dependencies get moved onto hackage.
> I don't know why wxhaskell is not there. I don't see gtk2hs there
with the aim of turning it into a Cabal package, which could then join
the party, but I don't know what the timescale is.
In the meantime, I could hack around it (as I did with base), but I
need to be able to build wxhaskell and its documentation with ghc 6.8.2
and haddock2 on Linux, which I've not managed in my initial attempts.
Which version of wxhaskell is preferred, and do know of anyone who has