Open Korusuke opened 5 years ago
@Korusuke
I guess all hackage packages would require ghc....not sure about all this.
Not necessarily. They could also require cabal (https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/4715) or stack (https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/4633), which will take care of downloading whatever ghc
version is specified in cabal.yaml
or stack.yaml
.
Firstly there are a few packages that are not present upstream but even then declared as dependencies so that should not be added by upt-hackage itself. Example:
unbuildable
,invalid-cabal-flag-settings
, etc.. Do we agree on this? ping @Steap
Why are these dependencies specified? How are they resolved when Haskell tooling needs them?
Why are these dependencies specified? How are they resolved when Haskell tooling needs them?
I am not really sure about this as I have no experience with haskell or hackage but from what I found, invalid-cabal-flag-settings
is declared when package doesn't declare flags for base. reference.
unbuildable
as per it's cabal file is used to "express impossible build configurations" and from what I notice is used most times to say that the package cannot be build on windows.
So how should we proceed with this?
Firstly there are a few packages that are not present upstream but even then declared as dependencies so that should not be added by upt-hackage itself. Example:
unbuildable
,invalid-cabal-flag-settings
, etc.. Do we agree on this? ping @SteapThen there are ports which are present in hackage but we might not want to mention as dependencies ever like
bytestring
,unix
,win-32
,base
, etc.. so can we comeup with list of such ports and filter them out and I guess all hackage packages would requireghc
....not sure about all this.ping @mojca @essandess