[darcs-users] darcs patch: use gzipFormat instead of GZip to work a... (and 4 more)

Ganesh Sittampalam ganesh at earth.li
Sun Aug 30 08:35:17 UTC 2009


On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Jason Dagit wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Ganesh Sittampalam<ganesh at earth.li> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Aug 2009, Jason Dagit wrote:
>>
>>> Sat Aug 29 19:22:09 PDT 2009  Jason Dagit <dagit at codersbase.com>
>>>  * use gzipFormat instead of GZip to work around deprecation warning.
>>
>> This is because zlib is deprecating the constructors for abstraction
>> reasons; this change is obviously correct and is something I'd been meaning
>> to get around to myself.
>
> Do we need to update anything in the .cabal file or add conditional
> compilation for older versions of zlib?

No, because we already require the version that has those 
smart constructors (gzipFormat etc) because of the GZCRCs work. If we 
really needed to support an older version we could add conditional 
compilation and do so, but obviously it'd be better from the pov of the 
code not to.

>>> Sat Aug 29 19:26:19 PDT 2009  Jason Dagit <dagit at codersbase.com>
>>>  * enable -Werror for now
>>>  On the one had, shipping release code without treating warnings as
>>>  errors makes a lot of pragmatic sense.  On the other hand, during
>>>  development it would be nice if we notice and deal with warnings as
>>>  soon as possible.  Therefore, I would like to reenable the treatment
>>>  of warnings as errors until the next release.
>>
>> This is a policy decision and I'm not sure I agree with it, because of the
>> variability between GHC 6.8, 6.10 and in the future GHC 6.12. But if we
>> don't actually add -Werror we should all do better at cleaning up warnings
>> we do notice.
>
> Then maybe what we need is some conditional cabal logic so that the
> test suite builds with -Werror.  Or there is a check for ghc 6.10.  I
> just really don't like seeing warnings.

Agreed, I'm just not sure how to avoid warnings completely and easily when 
each developer is only using a particular version of GHC and can't check 
that their changes don't introduce warnings on other versions. If people 
were more rigorous about watching the buildbots that might be an 
acceptable substitute, but I don't think they are.

> I'm attaching an amended version of the bad patch.  If you want to
> apply some but not all of the patches that is fine.  For example if
> you want to omit the -Werror patch that's okay with me.

The TouchesFiles one looks fine now.

Cheers,

Ganesh


More information about the darcs-users mailing list