Add s/cmm-sources + extra-bundled-libraries#4857
Conversation
# Conflicts: # Cabal/Distribution/PackageDescription/Check.hs # Cabal/Distribution/PackageDescription/Parsec/FieldDescr.hs # Cabal/Distribution/Parsec/Types/FieldDescr.hs # Cabal/doc/developing-packages.rst
# Conflicts: # Cabal/Distribution/PackageDescription/Parsec/FieldDescr.hs
23Skidoo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks okay to me, but please add changelog notes.
| ++ concat | ||
| [ [ (path, "c-sources") | path <- cSources bi ] | ||
| ++ [ (path, "cxx-sources") | path <- cxxSources bi ] | ||
| ++ [ (path, "s-sources") | path <- sSources bi ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO asm-sources would be a better name. One question is whether we should have asm-x86-sources, asm-x86_64-sources, etc. instead of a single catch-all field... probably not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd argue for using if arch(...): in those cases.
I'm fine with asm-soures as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep, I also think that if(arch) is the right approach.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
especially given @phadej's elif using if arch(...) is quite ok I think
| mkProfLibName lib = mkGenericStaticLibName (getHSLibraryName lib ++ "_p") | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| mkGenericSharedLibName :: CompilerId -> String -> String |
| , listFieldWithSep vcat "extra-ghci-libraries" | ||
| showToken parseTokenQ | ||
| extraGHCiLibs (\xs binfo -> binfo{extraGHCiLibs=xs}) | ||
| , listFieldWithSep vcat "extra-bundled-libraries" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will see to this and the haddocks tomorrow. Thanks for the review!
|
This is not critical/urgent, but in general it'd be sensible to have things like |
Hmm... so how did I cause that. let's see. |
Not absolutely happy with this solution. I fail to come up with a better one though. The issue is that for some libraries, you might want to have _debug, _p, _l, as well as _thr_debug, _thr_p, _thr_l flavours.
8eb3bd1 to
7577105
Compare
|
I'm pretty annoyed that travis isn't checking this :( |
|
Merged, thanks! |
Summary: This is in prerpation for cabalification of the `rts`. To be actually able to parse this file, a rather recent Cabal is required. One after commit `357d49d` of haskell/cabal. The relevant PR to support the new `asm-srouces` and `cmm-sources` is haskell/cabal/pull/4857. Not that this does *not* allow cabal to build the RTS. It does however provide enough information such that cabal can `copy` and `register` the package properly in the package database, if all the build artifacts have been build properly. As such it does not require any custom handling of the `rts` package. As the rts as well as all the other packages built by the GHC built system are built outside of cabal anyway. Reviewers: bgamari, hvr, erikd, simonmar Subscribers: rwbarton, thomie, erikd Differential Revision: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D4174
Summary: With the introduction of `asm-srouces` and `cmm-sources` in haskell/cabal/pull/4857. Which was merged into `haskell/cabal` HEAD in`357d49d`. We can now declare the `cmm-files` properly, and as such they can be read out by the cabal library. Reviewers: bgamari, hvr Subscribers: rwbarton, thomie Differential Revision: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D4176
…res, extra-library-flavours, and virtual-modules. As pointed out by @hvr, haskell#4857, haskell#4875 did not contain the necessary "check" logic. This PR tries to address this shortcoming.
This is in preparation for cabalification of the `rts`. To be actually able to parse this file, a rather recent Cabal is required. One after commit 357d49d of haskell/cabal. The relevant PR to support the new `asm-sources` and `cmm-sources` is haskell/cabal/pull/4857. Not that this does *not* allow cabal to build the RTS. It does however provide enough information such that cabal can `copy` and `register` the package properly in the package database, if all the build artifacts have been build properly. As such it does not require any custom handling of the `rts` package. As the rts as well as all the other packages built by the GHC built system are built outside of cabal anyway. Reviewers: bgamari, hvr, erikd, simonmar Reviewed By: bgamari Subscribers: rwbarton, thomie, erikd Differential Revision: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D4174
Please include the following checklist in your PR:
Please also shortly describe how you tested your change. Bonus points for added tests!
So this is primarily, so that I can give the
rtspackagerts.cabalfile.But I believe these have uses outside of the rts as well.