| 7 Sep 2025 |
 emily | unless you just accept the bootstrap chain getting longer and longer forever | 21:31:30 |
| emily | which has big issues itself | 21:31:36 |
 Alex | Potentially, yes, which is mostly why I'd rather not. | 21:31:38 |
| emily | e.g. it messes up easy bootstrap of new architectures | 21:31:46 |
| emily | since now you have to backport codegen to every version | 21:31:59 |
| Alex | Definitely trying to keep the chain as short as possible, but there is always unregisterised GHC if absolutely necessary. | 21:32:34 |
| emily | yeah | 21:32:58 |
| emily | have you talked with Lennart about this? | 21:33:14 |
| emily | it would certainly be cool to see | 21:33:19 |
| emily | did you have to patch it for Hugs support? | 21:33:28 |
| emily | if you could get bootstrap via Hugs upstreamed to MicroHs and ensure that Hugs builds okay with modern C compilers, then I wonder what it would take to Hugs -> MicroHs + MicroCabal added as an option for the Nixpkgs Haskell package set. (where presumably very little would work, but it would at least be tantalizing incentive to working on closing the gap between that and GHC) | 21:36:12 |
 maralorn | What are my old and tired eyes seeing?
┃ > Encountered missing or private dependencies:
┃ > cabal-add >=0.1 && <0.2 (installed: 0.2)
Look at the installed. I have been wishing for that feature for years and have been procrastinating to implement it basically the same time.
| 21:36:26 |
| maralorn | This is amazing. | 21:37:05 |
