[Fedora-haskell-list] [Bug 250767] ghc-gtk2hs won't install with only 256MB RAM
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250767
Bug Zapper <fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|rawhide |10
--- Comment #10 from Bug Zapper <fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com> 2008-11-25 20:58:11 EDT ---
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 10
development cycle.
Changing version to '10'.
More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
--- Comment #11 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> 2008-12-04 04:23:18 EDT ---
Okay finally tested and reproduced this:
1) I installed f10 on a 256M guest vm
2) yum install ghc-gtk2hs
3) run top
For (2) package installs but the scripts take "forever" to finish: I suspect
the main culprit is libHSgtk.a (20M) -> HSgtk.so. Currently it is using about
330M of swap...
(3) shows ld running and using about 357M of vm...
Maybe linking from source is more efficiency than relinking from .a?
Perhaps you could try running the "ghc-pkg update --auto-ghci-libs" part of the
install scripts (rpm -q --scripts ghc-gtk2hs) to confirm this? I guess must be
the problem though.
Maybe we should just include the .o files in ghc-gtk2hs like we do for other
packages: these days 3MB is not considered that big...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 5 months
Re: [Fedora-haskell-list] Packaging guidelines and macros update
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen
> I would like to rename %ghc_postinst_script to %ghc_register_pkg and
> %ghc_preun_script to %ghc_unregister_pkg. I attach a little patch
> which shows the changes needed to macros.ghc and the templates.
I think at the same time we might as well drop the trivial %cabal_build and %cabal_haddock macros too.
Below is what macros.ghc looks like for me now. If this looks ok and there are no objections I would like to submit the revised packaging guidelines to the Packaging Committee for approval after the end of this week. If you could all take some moments to review https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Haskell this week that would be great.
I am building ghc-6.10.1-6.fc11 in koji with these changes so that we can test them.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=965243
Thanks, Jens
15 years, 5 months