ALHP/ALHP.GO
7
43
Fork 8
Code Issues 25 Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

shellcheck (and other haskell packages) are built against x86-64 haskell-* packages, and fail when using x86-64-v3 haskell libraries #11

New Issue
Closed
opened 2021-07-08 18:46:03 +02:00 by kageurufu · 6 comments
kageurufu commented 2021-07-08 18:46:03 +02:00
Copy Link

I haven't tested a large swath of these yet

I haven't tested a large swath of these yet
anonfunc commented 2021-07-08 18:58:10 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

I'm not super familiar with the haskell ecosystem. Do we need to build all haskell packages, regardless if they are any or x86_64, because they are so tightly linked together?

Or are there just linked to an older haskell version and need a rebuild?

I'm not super familiar with the haskell ecosystem. Do we need to build *all* haskell packages, regardless if they are **any** or **x86_64**, because they are so tightly linked together? Or are there just linked to an older haskell version and need a rebuild?
kageurufu commented 2021-07-08 19:05:33 +02:00
Author
Copy Link

I'm honestly not sure, I think it's ghc and all haskell-*, then build sub-packages based on those. Each haskell-* provides name-hashed .so files, and any changes will break abi-compatibility. Its honestly a huge mess to provide dynamically linked haskell binaries

I'm honestly not sure, I think it's ghc and all haskell-\*, then build sub-packages based on those. Each haskell-\* provides name-hashed .so files, and any changes will break abi-compatibility. Its honestly a huge mess to provide dynamically linked haskell binaries
anonfunc commented 2021-07-08 19:09:28 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

I feared that may be the case. May be worth considering ignoring all Haskell related packages for now until we get that sorted.

I feared that may be the case. May be worth considering ignoring all Haskell related packages for now until we get that sorted.
anonfunc added the bug label 2021-07-08 19:10:29 +02:00
kageurufu commented 2021-07-08 19:37:39 +02:00
Author
Copy Link

I agree

Thank you for all your work on this though, its been a thrill to play with

I agree Thank you for all your work on this though, its been a thrill to play with
👍 1 🎉 1
anonfunc commented 2021-07-09 15:07:38 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

With 293f1752a8 all Haskell packages are going to be removed.

Depending on how many Haskell packages you have installed, you may experience loads of local is newer then *repo* warnings from pacman, in which case you may want to use pacman -Suuy to downgrade them to official package versions.

With https://git.harting.dev/anonfunc/ALHP.GO/commit/293f1752a8c0745f6a6ed686a8728d2eb438a3b4 all Haskell packages are going to be removed. Depending on how many Haskell packages you have installed, you may experience loads of `local is newer then *repo*` warnings from pacman, in which case you may want to use `pacman -Suuy` to downgrade them to official package versions.
anonfunc commented 2021-07-09 23:04:16 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

Closing this in favor of #19.

Closing this in favor of #19.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
blocked upstream
bug
Something is not working
 build-failure
package build fails
 duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists
 enhancement
New feature
 help wanted
Need some help
 informational
Provides information about something
 invalid
Something is wrong
 invalid/corrupt package
Package needs to be rebuild
 packaging issue
priority: high
High priority
 question
More information is needed
 support
wontfix
This won't be fixed
No Label bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
anonfunc
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: ALHP/ALHP.GO#11
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?