Poor first impression

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Poor first impression

Fernando Cassia-2
I admit in shame never having heard about Haskell before. I know about PHP, Python, IBM' s REXX, TCL, TCL/TK, perl... but Haskell, never.

So, here's how I landed in Haskell-land: I was looking for a simple ncurses-based text mode mp3 player with some sort of basic GUI and found "HMP3" written in, you guessed it, Haskell.

So I follow the directions and download the huge 30MB+  ghc-6.6.1-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2. Bunzip2 it. tar xvf it. ./configure and "make install". So far, so good.
and I get the following message, supposedly telling me that the haskell compiler was installed OK...
=======================================================================
Installation of ghc-6.6.1 was successful.

To use, add /usr/local/bin to your PATH.

For documentation, see /usr/local/share/ghc-6.6.1/html/index.html
=======================================================================
(/usr/local/bin is already in my path)

So I decide to call the ghc compiler with no arguments to see if it was indeed installed, and I get this:

[root@localhost ghc-6.6.1]# ghc
/usr/local/lib/ghc-6.6.1/ghc-6.6.1: error while loading shared libraries: libreadline.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
#

So, I conclude that Haskell is not ready for prime time, if it cannot install itself correclty including shared libs in a standard Fedora Core 6 system.

Goodbye Haskell, I just wanted to compile a MP3 player, and perhaps if the compiler installed OK with no issues, I'd have taken a look at the language. But as of right now, I don't have time to waste with broken compiler installers.

Byebye
FC
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Dougal Stanton
On 27/04/07, Fernando Cassia <[hidden email]> wrote:

>  [root@localhost ghc-6.6.1]# ghc
>  /usr/local/lib/ghc-6.6.1/ghc-6.6.1: error while loading shared libraries:
> libreadline.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
>  #
>
>  So, I conclude that Haskell is not ready for prime time, if it cannot
> install itself correclty including shared libs in a standard Fedora Core 6
> system.

Don't back out yet, the water's lovely! :-)

GHC uses libreadline 4 (as mentioned in the error message), whereas
most systems seem to come only with version 5. The place where you
downloaded the GHC tarball (presumably haskell.org/ghc ?) also has a
compatibility version that includes the older libreadline.

If you install v4 now then GHC will work just fine.

I'd guess there should be a way to get the libreadline4 installed from
your package manager. Something like "sudo yum install libreadline4"
maybe? I don't use FC myself, so can't help further.

Cheers,

D.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Daniel McAllansmith-2
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=fedora+haskell+libreadline.so.4&btnG=Search&meta=

gives:
http://www.nabble.com/-Haskell--Re:-kernel-2.6.11-and-readline.so-t577156.html

as the first result, which appears to give a solution....


and, in fact, if I look at:
http://haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_661.html

which is where I presume you got the rpm from it states that:

"Note: You need the libreadline.so.4 and libncurses.so.5 libraries to use
this. Newer Linux distributions come with libreadline.so.5 only (e.g. SuSE
9.2), so we have provided a readline4 compatiblity RPM for this case."

I've got a sneaking suspicion that the 'readline4 compatibility RPM' linked to
would solve your problem.


Or maybe the fedora package manager chases dependencies?
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

C.M.Brown
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
Hi Fernando,

> [root@localhost ghc-6.6.1]# ghc
> /usr/local/lib/ghc-6.6.1/ghc-6.6.1: error while loading shared libraries:
> libreadline.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
> #
>
> So, I conclude that Haskell is not ready for prime time, if it cannot
> install itself correclty including shared libs in a standard Fedora Core 6
> system.
>
> Goodbye Haskell, I just wanted to compile a MP3 player, and perhaps if the
> compiler installed OK with no issues, I'd have taken a look at the language.
> But as of right now, I don't have time to waste with broken compiler
> installers.

Wow! Such a bitter response! All you need to do is install readline, found
here:

http://tiswww.case.edu/php/chet/readline/rltop.html

I think it's unfair to blame GHC for not having readline; the website does
indeed tell you about readline:

http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_661.html

Check out the paragraph under "Linux (x86)".

Kind regards,
Chris.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Miles Sabin
In reply to this post by Dougal Stanton
Dougal Stanton wrote,
> I'd guess there should be a way to get the libreadline4 installed
> from your package manager. Something like "sudo yum install
> libreadline4" maybe? I don't use FC myself, so can't help further.

It's even easier than that ... on Fedora Core 6 all he had to do was,

  yum install ghc

Cheers,


Miles
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Ketil Malde
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 06:28 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:

> So I follow the directions

Which directions are those?  If they somehow tell users of Fedora to
download tarballs, they should be rectified to instruct users to 'yum
install ghc' instead.

> So, I conclude that Haskell is not ready for prime time, if it cannot
> install itself correclty including shared libs in a standard Fedora
> Core 6 system

Well - readline 4 *is* available on FC6, while presumably there exist
other distributions that haven't upgraded to readline 5 yet.  Since FC6
and most other updated distributions ship ghc as a native package, I'm
not convinced this is an unreasonable default.

-k

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Fernando Cassia-2
In reply to this post by C.M.Brown

On 4/27/07, C.M.Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

Wow! Such a bitter response! All you need to do is install readline, found
here:

http://tiswww.case.edu/php/chet/readline/rltop.html 

I think it's unfair to blame GHC for not having readline; the website does
indeed tell you about readline:

http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_661.html

Thanks to all for the helpful responses. I was just operating in "automated mode" so I didn't read all the text in the download page, just clicked to start the download and moved on...

But just think about it... is it easier to DOCUMENT the problem or just include a workaround in the make install code?

IF {library not available} then
echo "you need to get asdfzxcv lib. before the compiler will work. please use yum or apt-get"

Is that too much to ask for?. The fingers of both hands are not enough to count situations like this where developers spend more time documenting the problem rather than fixing it with some user-friendlyness in the install script.

Again, thanks for the help.
FC


_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Spencer Janssen-2
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 06:28:48 -0300
"Fernando Cassia" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I admit in shame never having heard about Haskell before. I know
> about PHP, Python, IBM' s REXX, TCL, TCL/TK, perl... but Haskell,
> never.
>
> So, here's how I landed in Haskell-land: I was looking for a simple
> ncurses-based text mode mp3 player with some sort of basic GUI and
> found "HMP3" written in, you guessed it, Haskell.
>
> So I follow the directions and download the huge 30MB+
> ghc-6.6.1-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2. Bunzip2 it. tar xvf
> it. ./configure and "make install". So far, so good.
> and I get the following message, supposedly telling me that the
> haskell compiler was installed OK...
> =======================================================================
> Installation of ghc-6.6.1 was successful.
>
> To use, add /usr/local/bin to your PATH.
>
> For documentation, see /usr/local/share/ghc-6.6.1/html/index.html
> =======================================================================
> (/usr/local/bin is already in my path)
>
> So I decide to call the ghc compiler with no arguments to see if it
> was indeed installed, and I get this:
>
> [root@localhost ghc-6.6.1]# ghc
> /usr/local/lib/ghc-6.6.1/ghc-6.6.1: error while loading shared
> libraries: libreadline.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such
> file or directory #

Yes, that is a bit annoying.  The readline issues are mentioned on the
download page though -- you were warned ;).  GHC 6.6.1 is only a day
old, so there aren't very many binary builds available.  On the other
hand, GHC 6.6 has RPMs for FC5:

http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_66.html#x86linux

> So, I conclude that Haskell is not ready for prime time, if it cannot
> install itself correclty including shared libs in a standard Fedora
> Core 6 system.

Please don't make generalizations from a single experience with a
compiler version that is less than a day old.

> Goodbye Haskell, I just wanted to compile a MP3 player, and perhaps
> if the compiler installed OK with no issues, I'd have taken a look at
> the language. But as of right now, I don't have time to waste with
> broken compiler installers.
>
> Byebye
> FC


Cheers,
Spencer Janssen
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Fernando Cassia-2
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
Of course I meant friendliness. Consider English is not my native language. ;)

FC

On 4/27/07, Fernando Cassia <[hidden email]> wrote:
situations like this where developers spend more time documenting the problem rather than fixing it with some user-friendlyness in the install script.

Again, thanks for the help.
FC

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

greenrd
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:00:26 -0300
"Fernando Cassia" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> But just think about it... is it easier to DOCUMENT the problem or
> just include a workaround in the make install code?

It's easier to document the problem.

> IF {library not available} then
> echo "you need to get asdfzxcv lib. before the compiler will work.
> please use yum or apt-get"

Virtually no other open source project does this, in my experience.

It's better just to use yum in the first place, and only if that
doesn't work, try the tarballs.

--
Robin
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Alex Queiroz-2
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
Hallo,

On 4/27/07, Fernando Cassia <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>  Goodbye Haskell, I just wanted to compile a MP3 player, and perhaps if the
> compiler installed OK with no issues, I'd have taken a look at the language.
> But as of right now, I don't have time to waste with broken compiler
> installers.
>
>  Byebye

     "Haskell waves back, yelling 'good bye!' while the distance
between them increases. As a last thought, feeling sorry for the poor
boy, it raises a sign that reads: 'Newer Linux distributions come with
libreadline.so.5 only (e.g. SuSE 9.2), so we have provided a readline4
compatiblity RPM  for this case.'"

Cheers,
--
-alex
http://www.ventonegro.org/
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

brad clawsie-2
In reply to this post by C.M.Brown
> I think it's unfair to blame GHC for not having readline; the website does
> indeed tell you about readline:
>
> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_661.html
>
> Check out the paragraph under "Linux (x86)".

shouldn't library dependency checking be done in the ./configure
script?
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Joe Re
In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2
On 4/27/07, Fernando Cassia <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I admit in shame never having heard about Haskell before. I know about PHP,
> Python, IBM' s REXX, TCL, TCL/TK, perl... but Haskell, never.
>
> So, here's how I landed in Haskell-land: I was looking for a simple
> ncurses-based text mode mp3 player with some sort of basic GUI and found
> "HMP3" written in, you guessed it, Haskell.
>
> So I follow the directions and download the huge 30MB+
> ghc-6.6.1-i386-unknown-linux.tar.bz2. Bunzip2 it. tar xvf
> it. ./configure and "make install". So far, so good.
> and I get the following message, supposedly telling me that the haskell
> compiler was installed OK...
> =======================================================================
>  Installation of ghc-6.6.1 was successful.
>
>  To use, add /usr/local/bin to your PATH.
>
>  For documentation, see /usr/local/share/ghc-6.6.1/html/index.html
> =======================================================================
>  (/usr/local/bin is already in my path)
>
>  So I decide to call the ghc compiler with no arguments to see if it was
> indeed installed, and I get this:
>
>  [root@localhost ghc-6.6.1]# ghc
>  /usr/local/lib/ghc-6.6.1/ghc-6.6.1: error while loading shared libraries:
> libreadline.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
>  #
>
>  So, I conclude that Haskell is not ready for prime time, if it cannot
> install itself correclty including shared libs in a standard Fedora Core 6
> system.
>
>  Goodbye Haskell, I just wanted to compile a MP3 player, and perhaps if the
> compiler installed OK with no issues, I'd have taken a look at the language.
> But as of right now, I don't have time to waste with broken compiler
> installers.
>
>  Byebye
>  FC
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>

This doesn't seem to be a Haskell problem, so much as a package
management system problem.  As nice as it would be to have code
compile without a hitch on every distro of *nix, many packages don't.
For the most part, people just (and rightly should) use the package
management provided by their distro, which should automagically take
care of dependencies and version mismatches for you.

I've yet to have so much as a fuss on any of the many debian and
gentoo systems I've installed ghc on through apt/portage, and while I
have a disliking for rpms, I'm sure Fedora's yum system must have ghc
in their repository now.

Perhaps you were installing by tarball because you thought Fedora
doesn't have a recent version of ghc in their repositories?

Minor side note: ghc is just one of many (albeit the dominant)
compiler for Haskell.  Surely you wouldn't discredit C++ as a language
just because your borland compiler broke? :-)

--
Joseph Re, ACM@UIUC SigNet Chair
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

ls-haskell-developer-2006
In reply to this post by Miles Sabin


Miles Sabin <[hidden email]> writes:

> Dougal Stanton wrote,
>> I'd guess there should be a way to get the libreadline4 installed
>> from your package manager. Something like "sudo yum install
>> libreadline4" maybe? I don't use FC myself, so can't help further.
>
> It's even easier than that ... on Fedora Core 6 all he had to do was,
>
>   yum install ghc


Well. I mean, that practically tells me all about "poor first
impressions" and the OPs own level of competence.

Regards -- Markus





_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Fernando Cassia-2
In reply to this post by Joe Re

On 4/27/07, Joe Re <[hidden email]> wrote:

Perhaps you were installing by tarball because you thought Fedora
doesn't have a recent version of ghc in their repositories?

Exactly. I saw the latest version was very recent, didn't think any FC6 repos woudl have it.
As a matter of fact I wasn't even aware that FC6 repos had ANY haskell compiler in there.

Minor side note: ghc is just one of many (albeit the dominant)
compiler for Haskell.  Surely you wouldn't discredit C++ as a language
just because your borland compiler broke? :-)

Don't worry, I wasn't  as mad as I sounded. But I'm latin so I wanted to do a big scene so everyone pays attention and fixes this, either in the documentation, in the web page (by making the notice coloured red and <blink>blinking</blink> (joke), or in the ./configure script, or somewhere else.

Thanks to everyone for their replies and respect. I could as well have earned a flame or two, but you were all very cool and polite, which speaks volumes about the quality of the community you guys have here.

FC

--
Joseph Re, ACM@UIUC SigNet Chair
--
Dream of the Daily Mail
It is the Holy Grail
And then the BBC
Your life would be complete

-Manic Street Preachers, "Royal Correspondent"
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Stefan O'Rear
On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 12:11:30PM -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On 4/27/07, Joe Re <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Perhaps you were installing by tarball because you thought Fedora
> > doesn't have a recent version of ghc in their repositories?
>
>
> Exactly. I saw the latest version was very recent, didn't think any FC6
> repos woudl have it.
> As a matter of fact I wasn't even aware that FC6 repos had ANY haskell
> compiler in there.

Note that the Haskell standard hasn't been updated in almost ten
years.  The differences between GHC 6.6.1 and 6.2.2 (or whatever FC6
has) are relatively minor and almost only affect programs that are
unportable to begin with.

> > Minor side note: ghc is just one of many (albeit the dominant)
> > compiler for Haskell.  Surely you wouldn't discredit C++ as a language
> > just because your borland compiler broke? :-)
>
> Don't worry, I wasn't  as mad as I sounded. But I'm latin so I wanted to do
> a big scene so everyone pays attention and fixes this, either in the
> documentation, in the web page (by making the notice coloured red and
> <blink>blinking</blink> (joke), or in the ./configure script, or somewhere
> else.

> Thanks to everyone for their replies and respect. I could as well have
> earned a flame or two, but you were all very cool and polite, which speaks
> volumes about the quality of the community you guys have here.

It has been said many times and I will say it again - in the long run,
the only good thing haskell has is a community of nice people.
Everything else is cloned quickly.

Stefan
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Michael Richter-5
In reply to this post by greenrd
On Fri, 2007-27-04 at 13:09 +0100, Robin Green wrote:
> But just think about it... is it easier to DOCUMENT the problem or
> just include a workaround in the make install code?

It's easier to document the problem.

For the individual developer it is easier to document the problem.  For the development community as a whole it is easier if individual developers fix problems or at least make them more easily spotted than obscure notes in gigantic README files.

For the individual developer it takes, hypothetically, two minutes to add a note to the effect that an out-of-date version of libreadline is required while it may take ten minutes to add a check to the configure script (and test it!) and even a day to fix the problem to work with the current version of libreadline.  So yes, it is easier to document.  By far.

But now broaden the scope to the community.  The compiler is downloaded.  The process of building it begins.  (It does take a long time to build GHC...)  The user waits that long time and ... the build fails.  Now s/he has to search through output whose error messages are not exactly the most friendly in the world.  Typically, for example, you're about five levels deep into make and the error message that actually tells you what's wrong is in backscroll.  So you find that message and slap your forehead.  Doh!  You download and install your old version of libreadline and try again.  Time wasted?  Ten minutes at least.  More likely half an hour.  Lather.  Rinse.  Repeat.  (There are probably other dependencies to outdated packages, after all.)

OK, let's go the RTFM route.  Each and every developer reads each and every README file in each and every project combing it for references to bizarre dependencies.  Let's be hyper-generous and say that each developer only spends one minute on the README file; that the README files in question are a paragon of informational organisation (instead of the more usual data dump in no particular order).  Let's further suggest that it takes only five minutes to get all the unexpected dependencies worked out, downloaded and compiled/installed.  Total time to make up the fix?  Six minutes.

That one minute to find the information in the README file is far shorter than the time it would take to add the equivalent logic to the configure script.  So if you have one to nine end-users, the net time wasted to document instead of modifying the configure script is less.  But I think that GHC has quite a few more than nine end-users.  The aggregate time wasted in the community (without even factoring in the time required to compile/install the desired version of libreadline) suddenly becomes much higher than the time saved by not writing that configure script modification.  Indeed I suspect that the aggregate time wasted would be sufficient to justify the modification of the code to support the latest version of libreadline in the first place once you factor in the time wasted compiling/installing the correct libreadline version.

Now what relevance does any of this have to the individual developer?  Why would s/he care about the end-user experience?  Well, let us not forget that said individual developer is part of that overall community.  That said individual developer faces exactly the same wastes of time poring over README files (or, more likely, bizarre build errors) to figure out how to get the tools they use to compile.  That said developer, too, would be more productive individually, not to mention the community as a whole, if the majority of the development community's members were to fix problems rather than documenting them.

Virtually no other open source project does this, in my experience.

So why not be the first?  Why not be better than the Other Guys<tm>?

--
Michael T. Richter <[hidden email]> (GoogleTalk: [hidden email])
I'm not schooled in the science of human factors, but I suspect surprise is not an element of a robust user interface. (Chip Rosenthal)

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Derek Elkins
Michael T. Richter wrote:

> On Fri, 2007-27-04 at 13:09 +0100, Robin Green wrote:
>> > But just think about it... is it easier to DOCUMENT the problem or
>> > just include a workaround in the make install code?
>
>> It's easier to document the problem.
>
> For the individual developer it is easier to document the problem.  For
> the development community as a whole it is easier if individual
> developers fix problems or at least make them more easily spotted than
> obscure notes in gigantic README files.
>
> For the individual developer it takes, hypothetically, two minutes to
> add a note to the effect that an out-of-date version of libreadline is
> required while it may take ten minutes to add a check to the configure
> script (and test it!) and even a day to fix the problem to work with the
> current version of libreadline.  So yes, it is easier to document.  By far.
>
> But now broaden the scope to the community.  The compiler is
> downloaded.  The process of building it begins.  (It does take a long
> time to build GHC...)  The user waits that long time and ... the build
> fails.  Now s/he has to search through output whose error messages are
> not exactly the most friendly in the world.  Typically, for example,
> you're about five levels deep into make and the error message that
> actually tells you what's wrong is in backscroll.  So you find that
> message and slap your forehead.  Doh!  You download and install your old
> version of libreadline and try again.  Time wasted?  Ten minutes at
> least.  More likely half an hour.  Lather.  Rinse.  Repeat.  (There are
> probably other dependencies to outdated packages, after all.)
>
> OK, let's go the RTFM route.  Each and every developer reads each and
> every README file in each and every project combing it for references to
> bizarre dependencies.  Let's be hyper-generous and say that each
> developer only spends one minute on the README file; that the README
> files in question are a paragon of informational organisation (instead
> of the more usual data dump in no particular order).  Let's further
> suggest that it takes only five minutes to get all the unexpected
> dependencies worked out, downloaded and compiled/installed.  Total time
> to make up the fix?  Six minutes.
>
> That one minute to find the information in the README file is far
> shorter than the time it would take to add the equivalent logic to the
> configure script.  So if you have one to nine end-users, the net time
> wasted to document instead of modifying the configure script is less.  
> But I think that GHC has quite a few more than nine end-users.  The
> aggregate time wasted in the community (without even factoring in the
> time required to compile/install the desired version of libreadline)
> suddenly becomes much higher than the time saved by not writing that
> configure script modification.  Indeed I suspect that the aggregate time
> wasted would be sufficient to justify the modification of the code to
> support the latest version of libreadline in the first place once you
> factor in the time wasted compiling/installing the correct libreadline
> version.
>
> Now what relevance does any of this have to the individual developer?  
> Why would s/he care about the end-user experience?  Well, let us not
> forget that said individual developer is part of that overall
> community.  That said individual developer faces exactly the same wastes
> of time poring over README files (or, more likely, bizarre build errors)
> to figure out how to get the tools they use to compile.  That said
> developer, too, would be more productive individually, not to mention
> the community as a whole, if the majority of the development community's
> members were to fix problems rather than documenting them.


All these would be a very good points except they do not match the actual
situation at all.

1) The compiler was not built from source.

2) The compiler built successfully.

3)
[root@localhost ghc-6.6.1]# ghc
/usr/local/lib/ghc-6.6.1/ghc-6.6.1: error while loading shared libraries:
libreadline.so.4: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Finding one line in one line of output... quite a bit of rooting around.

4) The fix to the "bug" is simply download and install the libreadline4 shared
object.  No recompilation or reinstallation necessary.

5) The "gigantic README" with it's "obscure note" is here
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_661.html a few lines away from the
download link.  You can probably read it in the time it takes you to find and
click the download link.  Much quicker than waiting for a configure script to
detect the problem.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

David House
On 29/04/07, Derek Elkins <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Much quicker than waiting for a configure script to
> detect the problem.

The fact remains that there is a bug in the build process (configure
doesn't check for all the dependencies), and that users have fallen
afoul of the bug, so it should be fixed, no matter how well the
workaround is documented.

--
-David House, [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Poor first impression

Fernando Cassia-2


On 4/29/07, David House <[hidden email]> wrote:

The fact remains that there is a bug in the build process (configure
doesn't check for all the dependencies), and that users have fallen
afoul of the bug, so it should be fixed, no matter how well the
workaround is documented.

--
-David House, [hidden email]

That was my point. Applause. ;)

FC
--
Dream of the Daily Mail
It is the Holy Grail
And then the BBC
Your life would be complete

-Manic Street Preachers, "Royal Correspondent"
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
12