Wed Aug 29 18:10:21 PDT 2007 Manuel M T Chakravarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Adapting some breakXYZ tests to sorted output
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break003.stdout -1 +1
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break006.stdout -1 +1
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debu
Build description = HEAD on i386-unknown-linux
(cam-02-unx.europe.corp.microsoft.com)
Build location= /playpen/ghc/nightly/HEAD-cam-02-unx
Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-HEAD-cam-02-unx
Nightly build started on cam-02-unx at Wed Aug 29 19:30:00 BST 2007.
checki
Wed Aug 29 10:46:18 PDT 2007 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Add a test for #1375 (ByteString[_\e2_][_\80_][_\99_]s
[_\e2_][_\80_][_\9c_]lines[_\e2_][_\80_][_\9d_] eats empty lines)
M ./tests/ghc-regress/lib/Data.ByteString/all.T +1
A ./tests/ghc-regress/lib/Data.ByteString/bytestring
Hi all,
The short story is:
You need to
rm -rf libraries/bytestring
and then reget it, e.g.
./darcs-all get
The reason is that the repo is now the original repo, with history back
to the old fps days, rather than the repo forked from base.
Thanks
Ian
_
I'm trying to compile regex-posix on ghc 6.7. (Ultimate goal: happs on
6.7).
First, I patched by changing the cabal file to be compatible with the new
libraries broken out of base. I also had to add HsRegexPosixConfig.h to
include/regex (I just copied it from somewhere else on my hard drive whe
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 08:42:57AM +0100, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> | > How much is this style of name shadowing used in GHC? Do people think it
> | > is desirable?
> |
> | Personally I like to use shadowing and I think -fwarn-name-shadowing is
> | overkill, but there are cases where it can catch
Hello,
On PPC Max OS X in a recent HEAD, pp1 fails as follows:
> => pp1(normal)
> cd ./lib/PrettyPrint &&
'/Users/thorkilnaur/tn/buildbot/ghc/tnaur-ppc-osx/tnaur-ppc-osx-head/build/compiler/stage2/ghc-inplace'
-no-recomp -dcore-lint -dcmm-lint -Dpowerpc_apple_darwin -o pp1 pp1.hs
>pp1
Wed Aug 29 00:21:43 PDT 2007 Manuel M T Chakravarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Accept slightly different output in some breakXYZ tests
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break003.stdout -1 +1
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break006.stdout -1 +1
M ./tests/ghc-regress
Wed Aug 29 01:57:35 PDT 2007 Pepe Iborra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* adjust some tests
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break020.script -1
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break020.stdout -20
M ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/scripts/break021.script -1
M ./test
Wed Aug 29 01:57:12 PDT 2007 Pepe Iborra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Remove an old readme-like file
R ./tests/ghc-regress/ghci.debugger/currentstate.txt
___
Cvs-ghc mailing list
Cvs-ghc@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
Wed Aug 29 02:02:02 PDT 2007 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* fix this test on Windows
M ./tests/ghc-regress/lib/Process/all.T -1 +7
A ./tests/ghc-regress/lib/Process/process004.stderr-i386-unknown-mingw32
A ./tests/ghc-regress/lib/Process/process004.stdout-i386-unknown-mingw32
_
Thanks Manuel for the heads up.
Don't worry, it had nothing to do with type families. I just was a
bit sloppy yesterday (I would swear I had amended that patch..).
I guess I could have avoided this if I were running validate in a
separate darcs repository, apart from the development one.
Che
Wed Aug 29 01:53:05 PDT 2007 Pepe Iborra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Wibble
M ./compiler/ghci/InteractiveUI.hs -1 +1
___
Cvs-ghc mailing list
Cvs-ghc@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
| > How much is this style of name shadowing used in GHC? Do people think it
| > is desirable?
|
| Personally I like to use shadowing and I think -fwarn-name-shadowing is
| overkill, but there are cases where it can catch real bugs. Take this as a
| vote against rather than a veto; I'll go with th
Build results:
x86-64 Linux head: fail (failed darcs)
x86 Windows head: fail (failed darcs)
x86 Windows head fast: pass fail (failed darcs) fail (failed darcs)
fail (failed darcs) fail (failed darcs) pass
gbesh Intel x86_64 Linux head: pass
kahl G5 Gentoo Linux hea
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote,
I just ran validate on the current head.
Unexpected failures:
break003(ghci)
break006(ghci)
break012(ghci)
break013(ghci)
break018(ghci)
These have some slight permutation of the output. I don't think any
of that changes the meaning or quality of
16 matches
Mail list logo