Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in Unsupported. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!

FS#17875 - [ghc] should provide "haddock"

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Peter Simons (peti) - Sunday, 17 January 2010, 15:56 GMT
Last edited by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Thursday, 23 June 2011, 15:30 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 2
Private No


GHC 6.12.1 installs a haddock binary, but the PKGBUILD doesn't list the package in the "provides" variable. It probably should?
This task depends upon

Closed by  Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai)
Thursday, 23 June 2011, 15:30 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't fix
Additional comments about closing:  Reversed the original fix
Comment by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Sunday, 17 January 2010, 21:10 GMT
Is there a standalone haddock package? If so, then it should provide haddock, otherwise not.
Comment by Thomas Dziedzic (tomd123) - Monday, 18 January 2010, 03:59 GMT
haddock is in the aur, but not in core/extra/community
Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Monday, 01 February 2010, 06:47 GMT
Added provides haddock to ghc. This alone is not worth a rebuild and upload of a 100MB package, however
Comment by Andrzej Giniewicz (Giniu) - Thursday, 12 August 2010, 10:14 GMT
Am I mistaken, or there is no haddock included - only wrapper script? Haddock cannot be find and cannot be installed (because it is provided by ghc) - while /usr/bin/haddock is simple shell script that picks between haddock 0.x or 2.x - it actually should be disabled as gentoo does in utils/haddock/ by setting utils/haddock_dist_INSTALL_SHELL_WRAPPER to no.
Comment by Andrzej Giniewicz (Giniu) - Thursday, 12 August 2010, 11:05 GMT
(actually after more detailed search - at least in 6.12.3 - there is haddock and utf8-string in sources, it is compiled, then it is used for build process - but isn't installed so also not registered in cabal database)
Comment by Andrzej Giniewicz (Giniu) - Thursday, 21 October 2010, 11:56 GMT
Is there some decision about what will happen with this? With stripped-down cabal-unaware haddock, one cannot get (currently only) Leksah to work without some renaming - because it depends on Haddock the library, not haddock the binary, about which Cabal have no idea, see the reverse deps on Hackage 2.0 - - also in Haskell Platform, Haddock 2.7.2 is recommended and cannot be installed, because ghc provides haddock 2.6 in binary form. I currently use version with haddock_dist_INSTALL_SHELL_WRAPPER set to no (I'm attaching pkgbuild and rest of files packed to this ticket), and then I can install both recommended haddock 2.7.2 (which contains like 30 more files than stripped down version that comes with ghc and registers with cabal) and leksah-server from aur or (how I do it now) directly from cabal.

If it will stay as it is now, what do you recommend to update haddock to recommended 2.7.2 and install leksah-server? Because I see no way to do it and I would really like to install haskell-platform from extra/community/eventually AUR and not manage it by hand.
Comment by Andrzej Giniewicz (Giniu) - Thursday, 21 October 2010, 12:22 GMT
Oh, and it also contains the file that I use to work around issue #20236 (
Comment by Magnus Therning (magus) - Saturday, 12 March 2011, 07:41 GMT
This issue is still valid for ghc-7.0.2-1

Is it not possible to build ghc so that it includes the haddock library (Documentation.Haddock)?
Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Sunday, 13 March 2011, 11:04 GMT
No, it's actually fixed in ghc-7.0.2-1.
Comment by Magnus Therning (magus) - Monday, 14 March 2011, 07:53 GMT
  • Field changed: Percent Complete (100% → 0%)
The package does list that it provides 'haddock=2.9.2', but it doesn't provide it fully, i.e. it only provides the binary not the Haskell module 'Document.Haddock'.
Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Monday, 14 March 2011, 08:32 GMT
Ah, indeed. Will investigate.
Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Monday, 14 March 2011, 08:51 GMT
From a quick inspection, it would seem to me that the sanest solution to this would be to disable the binary like Andrzej suggests, add haddock to extra and have haskell-platform depend on it.

I'll attempt the platform rebuild using this strategy.

Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Thursday, 17 March 2011, 08:33 GMT
These packages are causing nasty dependency loops which make it more difficult to make upgrades. I'm currently consider having less strict dependencies on all packages that touch haddock to make it easier.
Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Thursday, 17 March 2011, 08:33 GMT
BTW, this is currently the last pending thing before ghc-7.0.2-2 et co.
Comment by Vesa Kaihlavirta (vegai) - Thursday, 23 June 2011, 14:12 GMT
This caused a hell of a cyclic dependency, so I reverted the whole thing. ghc-7.0.3-2 in testing now again provides the haddock wrapper script, and the haddock package itself will go to community.