4 ms·

git-annex would be great! I've come to depend on it heavily for managing all my media files (pictures, music, video, etc.). I currently maintain the git-annex

git-annex would be great! I've come to depend on it heavily for managing all my media files (pictures, music, video, etc.). I currently maintain the git-annex-bin package in the AUR[0], which uses the official binary, but that's compiled for Debian and has issues on Arch. For people who want to use git-annex on Arch, the choices are either (1) use this buggy binary, or (2) install cabal and a bunch of Haskell stuff[1], just to compile from source. [0] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/git-annex-bin/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/git-annex-bin/ [1] which requires adding a separate repository, since Haskell is no longer in the main repos, and also installing a bunch of Haskell libraries that aren't in the AUR.

616c 13y ago
It is my experience with Haskell Arch packages, as the lack of forum feedback suggested to me, with my troubles with dependencies for pandoc or git-annex-bin,[0] to go and cabal it.[1] That is just me. I know that goes against the point of this whole post, but I wanted to learn more about Haskell and part of that for me was leaving the farm and running wild, so to speak. [0] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/haskell-setenv https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/haskell-setenv [1]https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=173781 https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=173781
- nemetroid 13y ago
  This is my experience as well, and the person who maintains "ghc/cabal-install/and the other haskell packages in [extra]" had a similar sentiment in a reddit thread[1] eight months ago. Cabal is able to give you enough headaches on its own. :-) I do love pacman and the Arch package database in most other regards, however. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/1f26hg/why_does_haskell_suck_on_arch/ca6wt0c