Skip to content

Conversation

@gelisam
Copy link
Owner

@gelisam gelisam commented Aug 1, 2021

My main goal with this PR is to check whether CI can reproduce Andreas's issue. But unlike #260, if CI passes, I think I'll merge this PR, because it's good to be using the most recent version of everything when possible.

@gelisam
Copy link
Owner Author

gelisam commented Aug 1, 2021

hmm, the installation-methods test fails before it gets to the interesting part, because it's trying to use Cabal 3.2.0.0 for some reason.

@gelisam
Copy link
Owner Author

gelisam commented Aug 1, 2021

ah, right, it's because I explicitly ask for cabal-install-3.2 when testing the installation methods like v1-install and cabal-sandbox which are no longer supported in cabal-install-3.4. I guess I also have to ask for an older ghc in those cases, while still using ghc-9.0.1 in the other cases.

this way the most recent minor version will be used. I somehow missed
this tip from c66f3ed's commit message.
@gelisam
Copy link
Owner Author

gelisam commented Aug 1, 2021

v1-install failed again, but this time the v2-install on Linux succeeded before the build was cancelled, so that answers my main question: no, switching to Linux (in this case by using github's Linux CI boxes) does not allow me to reproduce Andreas's issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants