Backport #10483: fix cabal install --program-suffix/prefix (fix #10290 and #10476)
#10511
+231
−2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
![mergify[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/10562?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
5 tasks
geekosaur
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2024
geekosaur
force-pushed
the
mergify/bp/3.12/pr-10483
branch
2 times, most recently
from
664ec19
to
fd8ee40
Compare
…10483) * fix cabal install --program-suffix/prefix (fix #10290 and #10476) When checking for existing installations, cabal would not account for an affix (suffix or prefix). So, if you had a `hello` binary installed, installing a second one with a non-empty affix (a perfectly legal operation) would fail. The reason seemed to be a typo in 09c04e9, which passed the arguments to the Symlink structure in a wrong order. When failing to install a binary because of an existing one, cabal would report suffix-less existing target even if a suffix was set. * Add regression tests for overwrite policies and porgram-affixes Add regression tests for the `program-prefix` and `program-suffix` flags combined with the overwrite-policy. In short, the overwrite-policy needs to take potential program affixes into account when deciding whether it will need to overwrite a program path during installation. --------- Co-authored-by: Fendor <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit ee3c313)
geekosaur
force-pushed
the
mergify/bp/3.12/pr-10483
branch
from
fd8ee40
to
5625274
Compare
|
Uh, help? Unexpected output failure on Windows: e.g. https://github.com/haskell/cabal/actions/runs/11653542318/job/32446051232?pr=10511 Something about handling the templates that are supposed to prevent that failure, from the looks of it. I know nothing about that, especially on Windows which is the only platform where it's failing. @philderbeast? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#10290 shows: when checking for existing installations, cabal would not account for an affix (suffix or prefix). So, if you had a
hellobinary installed, installing a second one with a non-empty affix (a perfectly legal operation) would fail.The reason seemed to be a typo in 09c04e9, which passed the arguments to the Symlink structure in a wrong order.
#10476 shows: when failing to install a binary because of an existing one, cabal would report suffix-less existing target even if a suffix was set.
This turned out to be a little issue in pretty printing.
I haven't gotten around to adding tests, sadly.
QA notes
Try to check that both #10290 and #10476 don't reproduce with this patch (they both have clear instructions for reproduction).
Template Α: This PR modifies behaviour or interface
Include the following checklist in your PR:
This is an automatic backport of pull request #10483 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com).