[aur-general] [arch-haskell] What to do now?

Rémy Oudompheng remyoudompheng at gmail.com
Sat Oct 9 04:43:41 EDT 2010

Magnus Therning <magnus at therning.org>:
> On 08/10/10 23:04, Peter Simons wrote:
>>>> Do we try to do something like what Xyne suggested--set up a Haskell ABS
>>>> and publish pre-compiled packages in [arch-haskell]?
>>> ...however, in the spirit of Arch (in comparison with the Gentoo which I
>>> left 3yrs ago), I consider that having kind of 'Haskell overlay' with
>>> binary packages would be very nice...
>> Yes, I agree that this is probably the best solution. Arch was designed to
>> work that way. How difficult is it to set up a repository? Does anyone know
>> how to do that?
> I think there are a few Arch devs reading this list, at least a TU or two,
> hopefully they can offer some more information.
> AFAIU it's not much to it really.  An ABS-like tree (perhaps kept in a Darcs
> repo for extra points :-) and a place to upload binary packages and the repo
> DB to.

I support that idea. I would really like to host that on the same
server as [community] and [multilib] repos, if the total size of the
repositories is not too big, but I fear it would be several gigabytes.
I imagine:
- keeping ghc + several basic modules in extra/community for bootstrapping
- a darcs repo one for the scripts
* a script that builds packages (possibly inspired by devtools, for
example an analogue of archbuild taking multiple arguments)
* a script handling rebuilds (build all reverse dependencies of
something in the right order) possibly just an option to the previous
* a script that updates a given collection of PKGBUILDs by calling cabal2arch
* a script that moves built packages to the repositories (like
commitpkg in devtools)
- a darcs repo for the PKGBUILDs
* one dir per package, and subdirs $package/trunk, $package/repo
(holding the current WIP version of the PKGBUILD and one corresponding
to the binary package in repo)
* people are supposed to do only a partial checkout of the darcs repo,
I know Git can do that, but that said, a full working copy is only a
few thousand files. Is darcs as efficient as Git for storage ? I
expect the transfer size for a full cloning to be less than 5MB.

Leaving xmonad and its dependencies in the main repos in probably fine.


More information about the aur-general mailing list