Initial environment check script

Don Stewart dons at
Mon Jul 19 12:48:45 EDT 2010

> >
> > 
> > Ideas for additional tests to add to this tool are welcome, as are
> > patches.
> haskell-platform-test.cabal:
> |  Build-depends:       
> |  ..<packages> ..
> Shouldn't that simply be haskell-platform-2010.2.0.0?
> In fact, where are the haskell-platform meta-packages
> on hackage ("if it isn't on hackage, it doesn't exist";-)?

Firstly, we've had a policy since the beginning of discouraging a simple
dependency on *everything* in the HP package, if it was on Hackage, as
it would over-constrain dependencies, meaning packages would break more
often. In a similar way many distros *provide* meta-packages for users,
but disallow dependencies on meta-packages.

Anyway, the meta-package isn't valid yet, due to:

(Custom build-tools).

> Main.hs:
> | import *
> | main =do print ..
> Well, apart from the fact that not all platform modules
> might be intended to be imported together, what keeps
> GHC from not bothering with unused modules?-)

Currently this script tests the ability to link all packages.
Which is useful, in case the installer broke.

> Also, the platform packages that used to be extralibs
> should still have proper testsuites - if those are on 
> hackage or could be undusted, they would offer a way 
> to get the haskell platform testsuite of the ground?
> The first goal for the haskell platform in terms of 
> testing could be to get back to the level of quality 
> that was provided by extralibs plus buildbots. Or
> at least close to that level (building the extralibs
> for every ghc patch did offer fairly immediate
> alerts to both package and ghc maintainers).
> As long as the tests are automated, the distro 
> maintainers might be willing to run the testsuite
> once a week or so, using their machines as 
> buildbots and posting the build results to the 
> haskell platform list?

I'd welcome some patches!

More information about the Haskell-platform mailing list