Haskell in Nixpkgs/NixOS | 726 Members | |
| For discussions and questions about Haskell with Nix, cabal2nix and haskellPackages in nixpkgs | Current Docs: https://haskell4nix.readthedocs.io/ | 145 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Mar 2026 | ||
I'm seeing a lot of "unknown operand" errors coming from clang during a stage 1 build.I'll try llvm-as instead. | 20:17:24 | |
| LLVMAS should be clang as was my understanding | 20:25:47 | |
| configure.ac literally checks for clang | 20:26:08 | |
| GHC cross may work again it was horribly broken last I checked | 20:26:38 | |
| there are aspects of it that are still broken and I couldn't get my first patch for that merged iirc | 20:27:56 | |
| Alex: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/blob/f8817879f94e4ea3e603808fd6370b8365818911/configure.ac#L556 | 20:28:00 | |
| Well, I just got to stage2 in the build with | 20:28:45 | |
| ah it was lol https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/merge_requests/13932 | 20:29:01 | |
| Anyway, back on
I can upload a full log, but I doubt it's very insightful. It seems that instead of targeting LLVM assembly, it's generating something else? | 20:33:06 | |
| https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/merge_requests/15231 should make a big difference. Sven is currently splitting off bits from this large branch and getting them merged | 20:33:07 | |
| Alex: do clang/LLVMAS version and LLVM version match? | 20:38:42 | |
| I would assume so, because I've undone the changes I made to
I'm not very familiar with x86 assembly, but it does look like x86 assembly. Even though GHC is being explicitly given | 20:41:12 | |
| * I would assume so, because I've undone the changes I made to
I'm not very familiar with x86 assembly, but it does look like x86 assembly. Even though GHC is being explicitly given | 20:41:32 | |
| Is the TH external interpreter supposed to work?
(Context: fixing the | 21:45:17 | |
| cc alexfmpe | 21:51:23 | |
I guess you may need to amend the default for enableExternalInterpreter | 21:51:49 | |
Could maybe do something similar to common-have-ncg.nix, like common-have-rts-linker.nix.Anyway, this feels like something that should be advertised by ghc.passthru and not blindly assumed (e.g. what if it's built without TH support?). | 21:58:58 | |
Anyway, here's the PR fixing pkgsCross.riscv64.buildPackages.ghc (but not touching the TH issue).https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/501439 | 22:00:07 | |
* Here's the PR fixing pkgsCross.riscv64.buildPackages.ghc (but not touching the TH issue).https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/501439 | 22:00:41 | |
| https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/commit/a0e417411fa6518436741aabe2c72e22a3309b19#b7ec52d5e302083ed03503182f1293694dda24f3_438_438 | 23:56:04 | |
| Seems to only have been supported for risc recently | 23:56:15 | |
| Maybe try 9.12 | 23:56:33 | |
| I never was able to test riscv because of the libffi error | 23:56:47 | |
| 20 Mar 2026 | ||
In reply to @sternenseemann:systemli.orgNot sure there's a benefit. It would fail with the 'need external interpreter' message instead? | 00:19:48 | |
| As long as iserv-proxy builds for that platform, I don't think there's regressions by enabling external interpreter | 00:20:21 | |
sterni would you happen to know how to do that, given that you mentioned it?
It looks like | 00:23:17 | |
| That's true, but it does needlessly increase the build closure. | 00:24:18 | |
| Fair. There's an opt out for ghcjs, maybe add it for riscv, possibly conditional on version. Does 9.12 or 9.14 work? | 00:25:27 | |
| Also, treatment of libffi changed recently on ghc. Maybe try ghcHEAD | 00:26:34 | |
I noticed that GHC considers it important enough to mention whether the RTS linker exists in --info, so I'm leaning more and more in favour of adding it to passthru. | 00:33:50 | |