Declare dependency on the 'alex' build tool in the Cabal file.

[peti]

Completes the fix for #26.

[alanz]

Well that was embarrasingly simple.

I will make a new release for it

[tpsinnem]

I still get the same failure upon trying to 'cabal install' this :(. I don't actually know what cabal does with these, but I note that although there now is:

build-tools: happy >= 1.18.5, alex >= 3.0.5

Another line below is still only:

Build-tools: happy

Could this cause that?

[alanz]

You are a victim of this

haskell/cabal#220

The buid-tools are not automatically processed as dependencies, so the installler has to make sure the right ones are present.

This is the original reason I put a pre-generated Lexer.hs in the package, so casual installers could bring it in.

I suspect I may have to go back to something like that, but with GHC version specific includes.

[tpsinnem]

Apparently having alex 3.0.5, as prescribed in the dependencies, was not enough. After first explicitly installing the newest alex (3.1.3), I was able to install language-javascript. I had by this time also installed the cabal 1.20 release candidate, but didn't research whether or not it made a difference.

[alanz]

Ok.

Do you suggest I raise the requirement (but only for GHC 7.8.2), or should
I go back to the old way of pregenerating it, and make sure I have two
versions of the lexer, one for current and one for older GHC?

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Timo Petteri Sinnemäki <
[email protected]> wrote:

Apparently having alex 3.0.5, as prescribed in the dependencies, was not
enough. After first explicitly installing the newest alex (3.1.3), I was
able to install language-javascript. I had by this time also installed the
cabal 1.20 release candidate, but didn't research whether or not it made a
difference.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/29#issuecomment-40792958
.

[tpsinnem]

Unfortunetaly I don't have much of a clue on the relative merits of either :-/

[peti]

The dependency spec should be fixed, obviously, but please don't include generated files in the distribution tarball outside of "dist". That choice causes trouble, too!

[tpsinnem]

FWIW, I also, at an earlier stage, installed happy version 1.19.3 at suggestion from #yesod on freenode, but, again, I haven't looked into whether this is significant.

[alanz]

From the distribution point of view they are not generated at
compile/install time, and to my understanding dist is deleted / rebuilt
from scratch when installing.

Hence they will have to go into some kind of extra directory.

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Peter Simons [email protected]:

The dependency spec should be fixed, obviously, but please don't include
generated files in the distribution tarball outside of "dist". That choice
causes trouble, too!

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/29#issuecomment-40795714
.

[peti]

Are you sure? I think "dist" is used by "cabal sdist" specifically to include platform-independent, generated files in the release tarball so that users don't need to have extra build tools installed that generate them.