[nightly] 21-Aug-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 Thu Aug 21 18:02:06 BST 2008. checking out

Re: [PATCH] Add StGIT support to ./sync-all

2008/8/20 Samuel Bronson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > sync-all |7 +++ Thanks. I've added this change to the updated version of sync-all that has been hanging around on the Wiki for a while. The updated Darcs patch is at http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/attachment/wiki/DarcsConversion/sync-

patch applied (ghc): Don't use the cc-options from packages when compiling .hc files

Thu Aug 21 08:55:49 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Don't use the cc-options from packages when compiling .hc files Now that we don't include any header files in .hc apart from our own, the cc-options from packages are at best superfluous, so don't pass them. We still pass

Re: patch applied (ghc): move directory after Win32/unix

Simon Marlow wrote: Simon Marlow wrote: Thu Aug 21 03:04:36 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * move directory after Win32/unix M ./libraries/Makefile -2 +2 Aargh, I just broke validate on Unix. Please don't pull the last few patches until I've fixed this. Should be straigh

patch applied (ghc): Improve error message when 'forall' is not a keyword

Thu Aug 21 05:35:02 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Improve error message when 'forall' is not a keyword M ./compiler/rename/RnEnv.lhs -5 +8 M ./compiler/rename/RnTypes.lhs -1 +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080821123502-1287e-719f8c2a314b01ed3985eb2bd8

patch applied (testsuite): Follow error messages for explicit-forall syntax

Thu Aug 21 07:10:43 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Follow error messages for explicit-forall syntax M ./tests/ghc-regress/rename/should_fail/rnfail052.stderr -1 +4 M ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/tcfail166.stderr +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/testsuite/_darc

patch applied (testsuite): Update output of explicit-forall failure

Wed Aug 20 05:11:44 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Update output of explicit-forall failure M ./tests/ghc-regress/rename/should_fail/rnfail052.stderr +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/testsuite/_darcs/patches/20080820121144-1287e-f58dedeb443d576300f4055751d3cd65be4d246c.gz

Re: patch applied (ghc): move directory after Win32/unix

Simon Marlow wrote: Thu Aug 21 03:04:36 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * move directory after Win32/unix M ./libraries/Makefile -2 +2 Aargh, I just broke validate on Unix. Please don't pull the last few patches until I've fixed this. Cheers, Simon __

patch applied (ghc): move directory after Win32/unix

Thu Aug 21 03:04:36 PDT 2008 Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * move directory after Win32/unix M ./libraries/Makefile -2 +2 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080821100436-12142-e413bc566dd7cf694f649755c9f899ffa71f7e15.gz

patch applied (ghc): Fix Haddock comments in TcGenDeriv

Thu Aug 21 00:49:24 PDT 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Fix Haddock comments in TcGenDeriv M ./compiler/typecheck/TcGenDeriv.lhs -2 +2 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080821074924-1287e-52f24e531dd16b9fec1d27064f0737d115b50a61.gz _

RE: After enjoying a working GHC HEAD build for a few days...

Fixed. Simon bash-3.2$ darcs what hunk ./compiler/typecheck/TcGenDeriv.lhs 1300 -mk_data_type_name :: TyCon -> RdrName -- $tT +mk_data_type_name :: TyCon -> RdrName -- "$tT" hunk ./compiler/typecheck/TcGenDeriv.lhs 1303 -mk_constr_name :: DataCon -> RdrName -- $cC +mk_constr_name :: DataCon -

Daily report for stable

Build results: tnaur PPC OSX stable 2: pass tnaur x86 Linux stable: pass x86 Windows stable: fail (failed stage1) x86 Windows stable fast: pass pass pass pass fail (failed getsubrepos) pass pass x86-64 Linux stable: fail (failed stage1) Old unexpected test failures: TyFamUndec

RE: After enjoying a working GHC HEAD build for a few days...

I suspect that is my fault, although I did validate. I will check Ian: could validate continue after a Haddock failure, and simply report it along with other test failures? That would stop a Haddock failure completely borking the validate run. Or would that be hard? Simon | -Original Mes