[nightly] 07-Jul-2008 build of STABLE on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx.europe.corp.microsoft.com)

Build description = STABLE on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx.europe.corp.microsoft.com) Build location= /playpen/simonmar/nightly/STABLE Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-STABLE-cam-02-unx Nightly build started on cam-02-unx at Mon Jul 7 18:12:05 BST 2008. checkin

Re: Is the HEAD dead? Or my daily HEAD breakage...

Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: Thanks for that. It helped. Now I get: [...] mv: rename GNUmakefile to GNUmakefile.tmp: No such file or directory Preprocessing library base-3.0... Undefined symbols: Unpulling the three hsc2hs patches from yesterday fixes this. Roman ___

Re: Is the HEAD dead? Or my daily HEAD breakage...

Simon Marlow: Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: In the meantime, I followed SimonPJ's suggestion on the ghc list to If you do a 'darcs pull' then 'make distclean' then 'make' you may (just now) get errors of various kinds when 'make' reaches utils/ ghc-pkg. Solution: cd compat; rm **/*.{hi,o}

[nightly] 07-Jul-2008 build of HEAD on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx.europe.corp.microsoft.com)

Build description = HEAD on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx.europe.corp.microsoft.com) Build location= /playpen/simonmar/nightly/HEAD Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-HEAD-cam-02-unx Nightly build started on cam-02-unx at Mon Jul 7 18:02:05 BST 2008. checking out

Re: Haddock 2 and GHC builds (Re: build fails while running haddock in fgl)

2008/7/7 Claus Reinke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> The problem is that Haddock has to be built with the final GHC >> version, otherwise it can't use the final version's interface files. >> So I was just referring to the method of building GHC without docs, >> then using it to build Haddock and then inst

Haddock 2 and GHC builds (Re: build fails while running haddock in fgl)

The problem is that Haddock has to be built with the final GHC version, otherwise it can't use the final version's interface files. So I was just referring to the method of building GHC without docs, then using it to build Haddock and then installing the docs. I was not referring to any new method

patch applied (ghc): Add a comment in validate saying where the hpc HTML is put

Mon Jul 7 03:38:16 PDT 2008 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Add a comment in validate saying where the hpc HTML is put M ./validate +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080707103816-3fd76-bdf578d751c647aa8a031d75e0298cc0c5319a76.gz

Re: Priorities for 6.10

duncan.coutts: > > On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 11:38 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote: > > Neil Mitchell wrote: > > > > >> While I was away last week I jotted down a list of priorities for 6.10. > > >> Some of these are in the bug tracker and some aren't, but I think it'd > > >> be a good idea for us to f

patch applied (testsuite): FIX BUILD

Mon Jul 7 03:00:10 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * FIX BUILD M ./timeout/Makefile +2 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/testsuite/_darcs/patches/20080707100010-12142-4ce85737900f97fa1cc424845f27f5ec2c7ea69d.gz ___ Cvs-ghc m

patch applied (testsuite): add another test for #1736, and mark pragma001/pragma002 as fixed in 6.9

Mon Jul 7 02:59:48 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * add another test for #1736, and mark pragma001/pragma002 as fixed in 6.9 M ./tests/ghc-regress/driver/all.T -1 +2 A ./tests/ghc-regress/driver/pragma002.hs View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/testsuite/_darcs/patch

patch applied (ghc): FIX #1736, and probably #2169, #2240

Mon Jul 7 02:58:36 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * FIX #1736, and probably #2169, #2240 appendStringBuffer was completely bogus - the arguments to copyArray were the wrong way around, which meant that corruption was very likely to occur by overwriting the end of the buffer in

patch applied (ghc): Fix Trac #2414: occurrs check was missed

Mon Jul 7 03:32:01 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Fix Trac #2414: occurrs check was missed This is an embarassing one: a missing occurs check meant that a type-incorrect program could leak through. Yikes! (An indirect consequence of extra complexity introduced by boxy types. Sigh.)

patch applied (ghc): White space only

Mon Jul 7 03:31:45 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * White space only M ./compiler/typecheck/TcMType.lhs -2 +2 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080707103145-1287e-cb12977a46fcad5a7ccb93aa16604a4b313f1e6f.gz ___ Cvs-gh

patch applied (ghc): White space only

Mon Jul 7 03:31:10 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * White space only M ./compiler/iface/TcIface.lhs -1 +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080707103110-1287e-0a01dde70b2d5898201a02552d858096d5643742.gz ___ Cvs-ghc ma

patch applied (ghc): Fix Trac #2386: exceesive trimming of data types with Template Haskell

Mon Jul 7 03:29:41 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Fix Trac #2386: exceesive trimming of data types with Template Haskell See Note [Trimming and Template Haskell] in TidyPgm. Merge to 6.8.4 if we ever release it. M ./compiler/main/TidyPgm.lhs -15 +29 View patch online: http:/

patch applied (testsuite): Test for Trac #2386

Mon Jul 7 03:28:01 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Test for Trac #2386 M ./tests/ghc-regress/th/Makefile +7 A ./tests/ghc-regress/th/T2386.hs A ./tests/ghc-regress/th/T2386.stdout A ./tests/ghc-regress/th/T2386_Lib.hs M ./tests/ghc-regress/th/all.T +3 View patch online: http:

patch applied (testsuite): Test for Trac #2414

Mon Jul 7 03:11:22 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Test for Trac #2414 A ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/T2414.hs A ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/T2414.stderr M ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/all.T +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/testsu

Re: Is the HEAD dead?

Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: In the meantime, I followed SimonPJ's suggestion on the ghc list to If you do a 'darcs pull' then 'make distclean' then 'make' you may (just now) get errors of various kinds when 'make' reaches utils/ghc-pkg. Solution: cd compat; rm **/*.{hi,o} That only works

RE: Is the HEAD dead?

I got exactly your (Text String) error, and Simon taught me about the solution below. I have not seen the error you give below, but it smells like version skew. If I were you I'd start with a totally fresh tree and make. It's a problem that when you pull then make 'clean' doesn't necessarily ma

Daily report for head

Build results: x86-64 Linux head: lost x86 Windows head: lost x86 Windows head fast: fail (failed stage1) fail (failed darcs) lost fail (failed stage1) fail (failed stage1) fail (failed stage1) gabor head:fail (failed boottestsuite) kahl G5 Gentoo Linux head: f

Daily report for stable

Build results: kahl G5 Gentoo Linux stable: pass x86 Windows stable: lost x86 Windows stable fast: pass pass fail (failed darcs) lost pass pass x86-64 Linux stable: lost Old unexpected test failures: 16791 kahl G5 Gentoo Linux stable 2014