New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

No ability to use --allow-newer when configuring with Setup.hs #3163

Closed
snoyberg opened this Issue Feb 18, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@snoyberg
Copy link
Collaborator

snoyberg commented Feb 18, 2016

A number of different systems (Nix, the Stackage curation tool, Stack) use runghc Setup.hs configure for configuring their packages. There are various reasons for this; since this bug report is about Stackage curation, the reason we have is to avoid having to manually match the Cabal library and cabal-install versions.

@bgamari asked me to run the latest GHC 8 release candidate through the Stackage gauntlet. Unfortunately, due to the lack of --allow-newer, it's quite difficult to do a proper test of GHC 8, which includes a new version of many core libraries. My ultimate workaround is quite ugly: rewriting the .cabal file with all version bounds stripped out.

For the record, all of this GHC release candidate testing is in the repo https://github.com/fpco/ghc-rc-stackage, which is just a Dockerfile, shell script, and some docs.

@23Skidoo 23Skidoo added this to the _|_ milestone Feb 18, 2016

@23Skidoo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

23Skidoo commented Feb 18, 2016

Can you use runghc Setup.hs configure --exact-configuration? The reason we don't have --allow-newer in Cabal is because Cabal's built-in solver is fairly primitive. Perhaps once the solver is separated from cabal-install (see e.g. #2768), we can make Cabal depend on it and remove its built-in solver, then you'll be able to use all advanced solver features via the runghc Setup.hs configure interface.

/cc @dcoutts

@23Skidoo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

23Skidoo commented Feb 18, 2016

Having looked at the code, I think I might be actually able to do something.

@23Skidoo 23Skidoo modified the milestones: Cabal 1.24, _|_ Feb 18, 2016

@23Skidoo 23Skidoo self-assigned this Feb 18, 2016

@23Skidoo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

23Skidoo commented Feb 19, 2016

@hvr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

hvr commented Mar 5, 2016

@23Skidoo I still oppose have Cabal depend on the solver library. See also discussion at #2768 (comment). IMHO Cabal should be as lightweight as possible as that's the one component we can't easily update.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment