Bugzilla Bug 4025

This should be placed alongside the other Haskell related ebuilds in dev-lang.

 # Copyright 1999-2002 Gentoo Technologies, Inc. # Distributed under the terms
of the GNU General Public License v2 #
/space/gentoo/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/skel.ebuild,v 1.8 2002/05/30 01:54:49 sandyma
c Exp  DESCRIPTION="A documentation tool for Haskell" 
HOMEPAGE="http://www.haskell.org/haddock/"  LICENSE="AS IS" 
DEPEND="dev-lang/ghc"  SRC_URI="http://www.haskell.org/haddock/${P}-src.tar.gz"
 S=${WORKDIR}/${P}  src_compile() {         ./configure \                
--prefix=/usr \                 --mandir=/usr/share/man || die "./configure
failed"         emake || die }  

Created an attachment (id=1689) [details]
ebuild script

Hi Thomas.

Thanks for submission!

1. I don't think either of these tools (including in #3970) should go in
dev-lang. New category should perheaps be created (dev-haskel). I'll go about it
but it'll take some time to get it approved (adding a new category is considered
a "major" change and thus requires approval of other developers).

1.5 At this moment I can see only 3 ebuilds that could go into it (2 from #3970
and this one). It is desirable to have somewhat larger list to warrant the
category. Do you know of any other ebuilds that could go in? 
Are there related non-major languages, apps for which could be combined with
haskell apps (to share the same category)?

2. Could you please repost the ebuild as an attachment. This plain-text posting
lost all the \n's and tabs..

3. Re #3970:
I suspect there might be a name clash with one of the three haskell compilers we
have in the tree. I seem to remember one of them installing hmake (all
lowercase). Do you know anything about this?

George

I can provide a different opinion: 
 
Ad 1. A dev-haskell category would be cool, and there certainly are more 
Haskell-related tools that could go into this category. Apart from the 
three major compilers/interpreters (ghc, nhc98, hugs), one could add tools 
such as Haddock (documentation), happy (parser generator), hmake (intelligent 
make-replacement for Haskell programs), DrIFT (tool to automatically derive 
class instances), lhs2tex (typesetting Haskell code with (La)TeX), Generic 
Haskell (language extension), Strafunski (a bundle for strategic programming), 
and certainly many more ... It is mainly a question of writing the ebuilds and 
sorting out the dependencies. I would be willing to help, as far as my time 
permits. 
 
Another possible category for Haddock might be dev-util, though. I think 
dev-util contains other language-dependent tools. 
 
Ad 3. hmake is needed and therefore installed by nhc98. I don't know right now 
whether it is possible to pass an option to the configure script that disables 
the installation of hmake. hmake could be made a separate package then. 
 
Andres 

Hi Andres.

Thanks for an update!
Nice to see this bug alive again ;).
Yes I will go about proposing the new category as soon as I collect a "crytical
mass", which is normally 3 packages. Right now I have hmake and haddoc here in
bugzilla, which makes for two. So as soon as I get one more from that listI'll
start processing them (unless of course this happens in a pre-1.4 release week
and folls on a feature freeze. I will not disclose the date, I can only say tat
this looks real close now ;)).

Re hmake: yes, the correct way to go would be to make hmake a separate package
and modify nhc98 to build only itself and depend on hmake. I'll take a look at
this as soon as I get to this topic (which will likely happen at the same point
as the new category creation). Thanks for confirming that this is the same hmake
(which I kind of suspected).

George

Hi George. 
 
Thank you very much for the prompt answer. 
 
Sorry, I did not see #3970 (hmake/HDoc) yesterday. Could you please clarify 
the "critical mass" of three packages: aren't ghc, nhc98, hugs, hmake, HDoc, 
Haddock already more than three? 
 
Apart from that, I will provide an ebuild for Generic Haskell soon (which is 
developed by myself, among others). 
 
Then, I have seen you have been assigned to #11045 as well (new version of 
Hugs). Could that ebuild be updated independent of the category question? 
 
I know there is a new version of GHC as well, but the GHC ebuild is horribly 
involved and I do not know whether I can upate it -- I might try, though ... 
 
Best, 
  Andres 

Hi Andres.

>the "critical mass" of three packages: aren't ghc, nhc98, hugs, hmake, HDoc, 
>Haddock already more than three? 
Well, the way it stands now, we have a dev-lang category for different languages
(i.e. compilers, interpreters, etc). Then we have dev-langname categories for
various tools or associated packages. Following this structure, ghc, nhc and
hugs should reside in dev-lang. Though looking at how many different
compilers/interpreters does haskel have it may be worth putting some of them
into dev-haskel. However tree is not that many, so for now I think they should
stay in dev-lang.

Back to the tools: Ok, there are 3 of them already, so I have sent a proposal to
create a new category. Now I will need to wait for 1 or 2 days to check if there
will be any arguments against (I don't think this should happen, but that's a
policy) and then I'll start processing those packages.

>Then, I have seen you have been assigned to #11045 as well (new version of 
>Hugs). Could that ebuild be updated independent of the category question?
Yes, I will, just did not get to it yet burried within some "real" bugs and
older submissions..

>I know there is a new version of GHC as well, but the GHC ebuild is horribly 
>involved and I do not know whether I can upate it -- I might try, though ... 
Well, ghc is quite problematic. Versions we have in portage would not compile
with gcc-3.2. Even worse, while they would compile with 2.95.3, that required *a
ton* of patching to be done on them.
Fortunately, I just got a report that the newvest version (5.04.2) seems to
build fine. I'll check the situation and if it indeed does will create new
ebuild. If you would like to help with ghc, please take a look at #6352. I'll
probably update it soon.

George

Created an attachment (id=6567) [details]
updated haddock ebuild

This is an updated ebuild for version 0.4 of Haddock. It is very
straightforward.

I added support for building the Haddock documentation, similar to the way it
is done in ghc-5.02.3.ebuild ... If that causes problems that I am not aware
of, the doc-dependency and the two if-statements for the doc-flag can safely be
removed from the ebuild.

Placement in dev-lang or dev-haskell, as before.

*** Bug 12835 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

I have finally added Haddock to portage, as ~x86. 
 
Closing the bug -- please test. 

should be closed.