Changes to GHC that will expose new packages

Magnus Therning magnus at
Mon Mar 26 08:32:44 BST 2012

On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 21:48, Mark Lentczner <mark at> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Magnus Therning <magnus at>
> wrote:
>> I see no difference between HP and other packagers; we all are in the
>> business of providing GHC and a choice of tools and libraries.  To be
>> a bit blunt: HP is a package of Haskell for platforms with poor
>> package managers (read Windows).
> To be equally blunt: I see users who use HP for Mac and Windows get up and
> running easily. I see users that don't have "poor package managers" (read
> Linux distros) struggle constantly in #haskell, even with HP. As a separate
> thread, we should think about how to improve the situation for those with
> good package managers!

I only keep up on issues around Haskell within ArchLinux, and I'm
almost never on #haskell, so I'm completely ignorant of any of the
struggles expressed on #haskell.  It'd be interesting to hear what
those are, but we'd better keep that for another thread.

The main thing I can see upstream do to help packagers is keeping
things separate. For instance even if GHC and GHCi is distributed in
the same source package, make it possible to compile and install them
separately (or at least have separate install-targets in the

At the moment I have no issues with CABAL and how it works, packaging
with it is rather painless.


Magnus Therning                      OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus at   jabber: magnus at
twitter: magthe     

More information about the Haskell-platform mailing list