Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

(haskell.packages.ghc802.ghc): (fix llvm dependency) #33045

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 25, 2017

Conversation

jflanglois
Copy link
Contributor

@jflanglois jflanglois commented Dec 25, 2017

Motivation for this change

The LLVM version associated with GHC 8.0.x is wrong.

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option build-use-sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

See Installing & Using the LLVM Back-end

Tested against a simple invocation of ghc --make -fllvm Main.hs.

Fix incorrect LLVM dependency of GHC 8.0.x to be 3.7 instead of 3.5.
@copumpkin
Copy link
Member

@jflanglois is there a reason GHC 8 depends on such an old version of LLVM? It's now the only package in nixpkgs that depends on 3.7 and thus the only thing keeping it around. I ask because of #30229, because it's quite burdensome to keep maintaining these LLVM packages, especially when they take a billion years to compile each. Can GHC8 be bumped to a newer version of LLVM somehow?

@jflanglois
Copy link
Contributor Author

@copumpkin I believe that the versions are pretty strongly tied because of how llvm is used (I'm not very knowledgeable about the internals). We could test it out with a more recent version, but perhaps it would be better to just disable llvm for ghc 8.0 altogether?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants