3 ms·
When did you last use `cabal`? Cabal works much better now, and most of the problems were due to over-conservative version ranges combined with an over-eager r
by Peaker 14y ago
When did you last use `cabal`?
Cabal works much better now, and most of the problems were due to over-conservative version ranges combined with an over-eager reinstallation policy that overwrote packages in a breaking way. That was fixed about 6 months ago, IIRC.
- burntsushi 14y agoA few weeks ago. And I'm not really referring to its weird behavior. To use cabal, you have to write a cabal file to specify dependencies, build instructions, etc. With the `go` tool, no such meta data is required. Everything that is needed to build a package is inferred from the source by the `go` tool. This is what makes it less annoying than most other distribution tools. Of course, most other distribution tools support a larger number of options, so perhaps its not a fair comparison. But that is irrelevant to typical workflow annoyances.
- Peaker 14y agoWell, how can it infer the dependency on particular versions? Or on particular implementations of some interface you're using?
- burntsushi 14y agoIt doesn't. Hence: > Of course, most other distribution tools support a larger number of options, so perhaps its not a fair comparison. But that is irrelevant to typical workflow annoyances. If you need to stick to a particular version of a software package, the common workflow involves using existing tools. (i.e., fork.)