Hi, Till -
Is packaging them as
haskell-X11
haskell-X11-extras
haskell-mtl
ok?
No, I'm afraid not. There are already two Haskell implementations
available in Extras, hugs and ghc. Additionally, the Haskell compilers
make no attempt to preserve ABI compatibility across releases.
For these reasons, the tiny handful of existing Haskell packages that
are already packaged are prefixed with the name and version of the
compiler they're built against, not with a simple "haskell-". For
example, the Gtk2Hs package is named ghc66-gtk2hs. This is a pretty
reasonable naming scheme.
Finally, packaging Haskell libraries is a subtle business, because a
Haskell compiler has its own package manager that needs to be treated
properly, or you'll have a terrible mess on your hands where RPM and
your Haskell implementation have different notions as to what's
installed. In particular with the X11 and mtl packages, older versions
of those are already shipped with ghc itself.
You should take a look at my cabal-rpm tool, which generates a clean RPM
spec file for Haskell packages that are packaged with the Cabal system:
http://darcs.serpentine.com/cabal-rpm/
Jens Petersen has been talking about establishing a Haskell SIG, which
would be a good place to air issues like these before bringing them up
for wider discussion.
<b
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
