Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Now if you say cabal -v"info +callstacks", Cabal invocations
will also get call stacks.

There's a heinous hack to handle version of Cabal that don't
support the extended format.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

The semantic change in this diff has to do with how
local signatures are treated.  Previously, we threw them
into the bag when mix-in linking, which means that if
you declared a signature, and another package brought
that module into scope, the signature would get "filled".
This is actually never what you want in non-recursive
Backpack, so this commit moves it so that we only put the
signatures in post-facto.  There is still some more sanity
checking we should do but I'm deferring that for a later
commit.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

New output:

Error:
    Problem with module re-exports:
      - The module 'Asdf'
        is not exported by any suitable package.
        It occurs in neither the 'exposed-modules' of this package,
        nor any of its 'build-depends' dependencies.
    In the stanza 'library'
    In the inplace package 'Reexport2-1.0'

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

I noticed that I was repeatedly writing the same code
to print out more elaborate information when we do builds,
so I refactored it all into one place.  In the process,
I think that I have made the build output more generally
useful.

The key changes:

    - There is a new function setupMessage' which takes in
      more information than the conventional setupMessage
      does, and prints a more informative message: whereas
      setupMessage will only tell you about the package
      it is being run in, setupMessage' will also tell
      you about the component and instantiation.

    - I applied this function to applicable sites, in some
      cases moving around messages to be closer to the place
      where an actual operation takes place.  For example,
      the 'Building' message previously only was triggered
      at the beginning of the build process; now it is
      emitted immediately before we call out to GHC.  This
      is a lot more informative, and avoids people thinking
      that we are slow because of preprocessing (we're not.)
      Something similar happened for Haddock as well.

Before:

Preprocessing library 'spider' for reflex-backpack-0.5.0..
[1 of 1] Compiling Reflex.Spider.Backpack ( src/Reflex/Spider/Backpack.hs, /srv/code/reflex-backpack/dist-newstyle/build/x86_64-linux/ghc-8.1.20170123/reflex-backpack-0.5.0/c/spider/build/spider/Reflex/Spider/Backpack.o )

After:

Preprocessing library 'host' for reflex-backpack-0.5.0..
Building library 'host' instantiated with
  Reflex.Host.Sig = reflex-backpack-0.5.0-inplace-spider:Reflex.Spider.Backpack
  Reflex.Sig = reflex-backpack-0.5.0-inplace-spider:Reflex.Spider.Backpack
for reflex-backpack-0.5.0..
[1 of 8] Compiling Reflex.Host.Sig[sig] ( host/Reflex/Host/Sig.hsig, /srv/code/reflex-backpack/dist-newstyle/build/x86_64-linux/ghc-8.1.20170123/reflex-backpack-0.5.0/c/host/reflex-backpack-0.5.0-inplace-host+FDoWUmUc0MMBtBRwItgjj9/build/reflex-backpack-0.5.0-inplace-host+FDoWUmUc0MMBtBRwItgjj9/Reflex/Host/Sig.o ) [Reflex.Basics changed]

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

* This is only enabled with the lib flag.
* We tell users not to use the library in the package description.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

This reverts commit 48c6f00b.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

[ci skip]

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

[ci skip]

[ci skip]

This reverts commit bacdf19b.

'hackage-security' has been updated. I tested that build works now.

hackage-security hasn't been updated with new bounds, so this
unbreaks the build.

This reverts commit eec15a35.

[ci skip]

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

In principle, you could get them out by demunging the sourcePackageId,
but it seems more direct to just let people read it out directly.
Use of Maybe ensures we don't write out these fields when they're
the defaults.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>

[ci skip]

Edward Z. Yang authored 8 years ago and Edward Z. Yang committed 8 years ago

- Report all reexport errors, not just the first one
- Give more information about how the modules are different
- Add quotes and prettify the foramt
- Preserve spaces when reporting errors

The new message looks like this:

Problem with module re-exports:
  - Ambiguous reexport 'Data.Map'
    It could refer to either:
         'containers-0.5.6.2-59326c33e30ec8f6afd574cbac625bbb:Data.Map'
         brought into scope by the build dependency on containers
      or 'containers-dupe-0.1.0.0-2AdbRP7BsOEKELRWSQejuE:Data.Map'
         brought into scope by the build dependency on containers-dupe
    The ambiguity can be resolved by qualifying the
    re-export with a package name.
    The syntax is 'packagename:ModuleName [as NewName]'.
  - The module 'Missing'
    is not exported by any suitable package.
    It occurs in neither the 'exposed-modules' of this package,
    nor any of its 'build-depends' dependencies.
  - The module 'Private'
    is not exported by any suitable package.
    It occurs in neither the 'exposed-modules' of this package,
    nor any of its 'build-depends' dependencies
setup: Configuration failed

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@cs.stanford.edu>