Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ghc-9.4.3 haddock crashes in Stackage Nightly #61

Closed
juhp opened this issue Nov 19, 2022 · 6 comments
Closed

ghc-9.4.3 haddock crashes in Stackage Nightly #61

juhp opened this issue Nov 19, 2022 · 6 comments
Labels

Comments

@juhp
Copy link

juhp commented Nov 19, 2022

Running Haddock on library for MissingH-1.5.0.1..
                                                                                                                                    
<no location info>: error:                                                                                                              panic! (the 'impossible' happened)                                                                                              
  GHC version 9.4.3:                                              
        funResultTy                                                                                                                 
  BinPackerError size_a5dp obj_a5dq   
  Call stack:                                                     
      CallStack (from HasCallStack):                              
        callStackDoc, called at compiler/GHC/Utils/Panic.hs:182:37 in ghc:GHC.Utils.Panic
        pprPanic, called at compiler/GHC/Core/Type.hs:1334:49 in ghc:GHC.Core.Type

Please report this as a GHC bug:  https://www.haskell.org/ghc/reportabug
juhp added a commit to commercialhaskell/stackage that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2022
@andreasabel
Copy link
Member

andreasabel commented Nov 19, 2022

cabal haddock works for me with GHC 9.4.3.
I can reproduce the problem with stack haddock and resolver: nightly-2022-11-19.

But not sure what I should do on my side here, @juhp.
Maybe you should indeed report it upstream to GHC (and/or stack / haddoc).

@andreasabel
Copy link
Member

I cannot reproduce this with nightly-2023-01-14 (GHC 9.4.4), so maybe this issue is resolved, @juhp?

@andreasabel andreasabel closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Sep 11, 2023
@juhp
Copy link
Author

juhp commented Sep 12, 2023

Thanks I agree 👍

@andreasabel
Copy link
Member

@juhp Shouldn't you have updated Stackage's build-constraints.yaml accordingly when this issue got closed?
I randomly noticed there was some left-over from this issue:

Anyway, how do all these extra sections (expected failures etc.) in build-constraints.yaml get cleaned up? Is there a procedure to ensure they do not accumulate outdated information?

@juhp
Copy link
Author

juhp commented Jan 19, 2025

@juhp Shouldn't you have updated Stackage's build-constraints.yaml accordingly when this issue got closed?

Probably/ideally, sorry, the best way currently to ensure this is still to open a PR yes.

I randomly noticed there was some left-over from this issue:

* [Remove MissingH from expected-haddock-failures commercialhaskell/stackage#7659](https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stackage/pull/7659)

Thank you

Anyway, how do all these extra sections (expected failures etc.) in build-constraints.yaml get cleaned up? Is there a procedure to ensure they do not accumulate outdated information?

Manually 😢 I wish we had more automation/CI

Stackage is not really a CI/QA service, though it sometimes feels like one...
But yeah I too wish things were better. Sometimes I'm really tempted to disable all the extras: tests/benchmarks it is a big overhead for us with the current tooling -- well I guess docs we can't really disable, so yeah maybe they are more important actually and much fewer issues (which is maybe why they are easily forgotten 🤷‍).

@andreasabel
Copy link
Member

Thanks, @juhp!
I think it is already good that recently all (? or many?) additions to the special sections are equipped with comments linking to the upstream issues.
Ideally there would be a more systematic evidence collection with automated checks whether the evidence still exists.
E.g.

  • if the evidence is some upstream issue, one could check automatically whether the issue is still open.
  • if the "evidence" is a certain GHC version, the evidence would go cold if the GHC version was upgraded.
  • same if the evidence was a certain version of the package (but I guess this part is already (somewhat) automated by the curator).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants