Re: patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-06 Thread Simon Marlow
Duncan Coutts wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 00:35 +0100, Thomas Schilling wrote: 2008/10/4 Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: all people who use the ghc-6.10 branch darcs repos deleting their libraries/bytestring repo and getting the new one. How is that different from having to call ./darcs-al

Re: patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-05 Thread Ian Lynagh
On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 12:35:36AM +0100, Thomas Schilling wrote: > 2008/10/4 Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > all people who use the ghc-6.10 branch darcs > > repos deleting their libraries/bytestring repo and getting the new one. > > How is that different from having to call ./darcs-all ge

Re: patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-04 Thread Duncan Coutts
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 00:35 +0100, Thomas Schilling wrote: > 2008/10/4 Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > all people who use the ghc-6.10 branch darcs > > repos deleting their libraries/bytestring repo and getting the new one. > > How is that different from having to call ./darcs-all get? it'

Re: patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-04 Thread Thomas Schilling
2008/10/4 Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > all people who use the ghc-6.10 branch darcs > repos deleting their libraries/bytestring repo and getting the new one. How is that different from having to call ./darcs-all get? it's just a 'rm -r' more. I guess the problem would be a confusing erro

Re: patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-04 Thread Don Stewart
duncan.coutts: > On Sat, 2008-10-04 at 13:32 -0700, Duncan Coutts wrote: > > All, > > > > We've got an unfortunate situation with the bytestring repo. It got > > accidentally forked after the ghc-6.8 release and is now about 7 > > releases behind and contains many known bugs and performance proble

Re: patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-04 Thread Duncan Coutts
On Sat, 2008-10-04 at 13:32 -0700, Duncan Coutts wrote: > All, > > We've got an unfortunate situation with the bytestring repo. It got > accidentally forked after the ghc-6.8 release and is now about 7 > releases behind and contains many known bugs and performance problems. > It would be pretty ba

patch to drop Win32 dep on bytestring

2008-10-04 Thread Duncan Coutts
All, We've got an unfortunate situation with the bytestring repo. It got accidentally forked after the ghc-6.8 release and is now about 7 releases behind and contains many known bugs and performance problems. It would be pretty bad if ghc-6.10.1 shipped with this ancient bytestring version. The p