On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 09:25:46AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
>
> >=> bytestring001(optc)
> >Segmentation fault
>
> This is a segfault from GHC - perhaps you have old interface files in
> your bytestring package?
Nope, it's reproducible:
$ ls bytestring001.
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
I ran a full testsuite today. Several bytestring tests are seg-faulting
consistently, when -O is on. See below. Does anyone have a clue about why?
Simon
=> bytestring001(normal)
cd ./lib/Data.ByteString && '/64playpen/simonpj/builds/HEAD-1/ghc/stage2-inplace/gh
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 23:37 +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 06:48:57PM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> >
> > code.haskell.org/bytestring has a MOTD telling people to ignore it and
> > use darcs.haskell.org/bytestring instead.
>
> Why do you prefer d.h.o over c.h.o, out of interes
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 06:48:57PM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
>
> code.haskell.org/bytestring has a MOTD telling people to ignore it and
> use darcs.haskell.org/bytestring instead.
Why do you prefer d.h.o over c.h.o, out of interest?
c.h.o has the advantage that it's much easier to add accounts
duncan.coutts:
> On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 08:50 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
>
> > > Don, what do you think? How about we keep bytestring on darcs.h.o and
> > > only move binary etc to code.h.o.
> >
> > As long as we have a head and stable branch. I don't want to validate
> > any time we make a change
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 08:50 -0700, Don Stewart wrote:
> > Don, what do you think? How about we keep bytestring on darcs.h.o and
> > only move binary etc to code.h.o.
>
> As long as we have a head and stable branch. I don't want to validate
> any time we make a change to bytestring, only when merg
duncan.coutts:
> On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 14:14 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
>
> > > If we're doing this we should be consistent about it. ie where the head
> > > should
> > > go, where the other branches should go. Here's Cabal's layout at the
> > > moment:
> > >
> > > Cabal HEAD: d.h.o/cabal
> > >
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 14:14 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
> > If we're doing this we should be consistent about it. ie where the head
> > should
> > go, where the other branches should go. Here's Cabal's layout at the moment:
> >
> > Cabal HEAD: d.h.o/cabal
> > ghc HEAD branch of Cabal: d.h.o/packa
Duncan Coutts wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Don Stewart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
simonmarhaskell:
Don Stewart wrote:
dons:
simonpj:
In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
What's going on with bytestring?
Looks like the last patch added a ',' to
duncan.coutts:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Don Stewart
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > simonmarhaskell:
> > > Don Stewart wrote:
> > > >dons:
> > > >>simonpj:
> > > >>> In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
> > > >>> What's going on with bytestring?
> > > >
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Don Stewart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> simonmarhaskell:
> > Don Stewart wrote:
> > >dons:
> > >>simonpj:
> > >>> In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
> > >>> What's going on with bytestring?
> > >>>
> > >>Looks like the last patc
simonmarhaskell:
> Don Stewart wrote:
> >dons:
> >>simonpj:
> >>> In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
> >>> What's going on with bytestring?
> >>>
> >>Looks like the last patch added a ',' to the end of a line, which was
> >>silently accepted by 6.6.1 which Dunc
Don Stewart wrote:
dons:
simonpj:
In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
What's going on with bytestring?
Looks like the last patch added a ',' to the end of a line, which was
silently accepted by 6.6.1 which Duncan uses, but failed with the head
(which I u
| So the moral of the story is that there are no trivial patches, not to ghc -
| which we all knew - and not to the core libs either, a fact some of us had not
| fully grasped but are now painfully aware of.
Don't worry! If not for ICFP you'd have fixed it the next day. And while it's
true that
In message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Simon Peyton-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > Duncan, the error message I get is
> | >
> | > Configuring bytestring-0.9...
> | > Setup: Cabal was not bootstrapped correctly
> |
> | This is an error from Cabal. This is bad. We get this error when Cabal does
> |
| > Duncan, the error message I get is
| >
| > Configuring bytestring-0.9...
| > Setup: Cabal was not bootstrapped correctly
|
| This is an error from Cabal. This is bad. We get this error when Cabal does
| not
| know its own version number and so cannot compare its version number to the
| one
| th
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Manuel M T Chakravarty
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote,
> > Unpulling up to and including this patch seems to make bytestring build
> > again
> [..]
> > Fri Sep 28 23:33:56 GMT Daylight Time 2007 Duncan Coutts
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
chak:
> Simon Peyton-Jones wrote,
> >Unpulling up to and including this patch seems to make bytestring build
> >again
> [..]
> >Fri Sep 28 23:33:56 GMT Daylight Time 2007 Duncan Coutts
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > * Use new style syntax in .cabal file and use configurations for
> > ghc-6.4.
Simon Peyton-Jones wrote,
Unpulling up to and including this patch seems to make bytestring build
again
[..]
Fri Sep 28 23:33:56 GMT Daylight Time 2007 Duncan Coutts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Use new style syntax in .cabal file and use configurations for ghc-6.4.2
We previously had a commen
dons:
> simonpj:
> >In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
> >What's going on with bytestring?
> >
>
> Looks like the last patch added a ',' to the end of a line, which was
> silently accepted by 6.6.1 which Duncan uses, but failed with the head
> (which I us
simonpj:
>In bytestring package, Data.Char8 doesn't even get past the parser.
>What's going on with bytestring?
>
Looks like the last patch added a ',' to the end of a line, which was
silently accepted by 6.6.1 which Duncan uses, but failed with the head
(which I use).
Patch applied.
-
| With the last set of patches to package bytestring, the head fails
| to compile for me (not building from a virgin tree, but after make
| distclean) on MacOs. It complains that cabal has not been build
| properly.
|
| Manuel
me too. here's the output
( cd bytestring && setup/Setup configure \
22 matches
Mail list logo
