Re: Strange permissions when installing HEAD

On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 02:46:14PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:07:18PM -0700, Tim Chevalier wrote: > > > > -rwx-- 1 root root 134 2008-09-12 22:28 ghc-6.9.20080912 > > Thanks for the report; I've fixed it locally and will push once I've > validated etc. Now pushe

patch applied (ghc): Comments only: ".core" => ".hcr"

Sun Sep 14 13:36:45 PDT 2008 Tim Chevalier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Comments only: ".core" => ".hcr" M ./compiler/main/DynFlags.hs -1 +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080914203645-d61e2-021ae7b8aed8a751cc8bd80d2fc87a51dc346e65.gz ___

Re: too many specialisations for one function

Still, I've seen this msg in building the libraries (something to do with HTML think) and it looked suspicious -- >why so many specializations? -- so investigating that is on my to-do list. Meanwhile, if you have an easy repro case, I'd be interested. Happens all the time when building ghc head

patch applied (ghc): We need to tell ghc-pkg to --force if we've only built a profiling library

Sat Sep 13 08:31:42 PDT 2008 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * We need to tell ghc-pkg to --force if we've only built a profiling library M ./compiler/Makefile -1 +4 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080913153142-3fd76-14efcd2d70815143b7335064db169ba80b7bf9a9.

patch applied (ghc): If we're profiling GHC, don't bother building the GHC package the vanilla way

Sat Sep 13 07:48:20 PDT 2008 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * If we're profiling GHC, don't bother building the GHC package the vanilla way M ./compiler/Makefile -1 +5 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080913144820-3fd76-870ab26b3a90153078fa6da7f74ec6beb99d3

patch applied (ghc): Remove the duplicate show rule in libraries/Makefile

Sat Sep 13 07:44:13 PDT 2008 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Remove the duplicate show rule in libraries/Makefile M ./libraries/Makefile -4 +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patches/20080913144413-3fd76-baf94e2093cf66d28e1acd3b053628b2ab2a83d3.gz _

patch applied (ghc): Move the "show" target from target.mk to boilerplate.mk

Sat Sep 13 07:13:12 PDT 2008 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Move the "show" target from target.mk to boilerplate.mk target.mk isn't included everywhere, but show is always handy M ./mk/boilerplate.mk +9 M ./mk/target.mk -9 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghc/_darcs/patc

patch applied (ghc): Change how we detect if we are using the bootstrapping compiler or not

Sat Sep 13 03:46:58 PDT 2008 Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Change how we detect if we are using the bootstrapping compiler or not I think looking for $(GHC_COMPILER_DIR_ABS) was failing on the Windows buildbot due to different path separators. Now we just look for "inplace". M ./mk

Re: too many specialisations for one function

The same happens when I build GHC head's haddock. On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Mitchell, Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi > > Using GHC Head from yesterday, I am encountering loads of warnings about > too many specialisations for one function. Some of these warning > messages take up at l

RE: Static argument transformation in 6.10

Max, OK, that makes sense. I'll commit a patch, commenting out , ([2], Opt_StaticArgumentTransformation) in main/DynFlags, with suitable comments. Simon | -Original Message- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Max | Bolingbroke | Sent: 12 Sep

RE: too many specialisations for one function

In general, it's harmless. I set an arbitrary limit on how many different specializations SpecConstr would make, and you are hitting it. (Only happens with a compiler built with -DDEBUG.) Still, I've seen this msg in building the libraries (something to do with HTML think) and it looked suspi

Daily report for stable

Build results: fast486 stable: fail (failed darcs) gabor stable: pass kgardas stable: fail (failed stage1) malcolm stable: fail (failed darcs) mnemosyne x86-64 Gentoo stable: fail (failed darcs) tnaur x86 Linux stable: pass x

Daily report for head

Build results: x86-64 Linux head: fail (failed stage1) x86 Windows head:fail (failed stage1) x86 Windows head fast: lost lost pass pass lost tnaur PPC OSX head 2:lost tnaur x86 Linux head:lost x86-64 Linux head unreg: fail (failed stage1) Old unexpected test passes: tc