Better naming convention for build directories about hadrian

[snowleopard]

I'll give it a try today. Please shout if you have any concerns about this proposal.

[hvr]

This sounds intriguing

Under this proposal ghc-stage2 will live in stage1 directory, because it is built by stage1 compiler.

...and where will ghc-stage1 then be located? :-) (and what will be found in /stage2 then?)

/cc @thomie

PS: This would have the effect that for (non-canadian) cross-compilers, the stage0/ folder would countain binaries and object-code runnable on the build-host, while stage1/ would contain binaries and object-code compiled for the target-arch. That appears to be nicely consistent

[snowleopard]

...and where will ghc-stage1 then be located? :-)

Well, in /stage0 :-) The bootstrapping compiler is referred to as Ghc Stage0 in the new build system. Does this make sense?

...the stage0/ folder would countain binaries and object-code runnable on the build-host, while stage1/ would contain binaries and object-code compiled for the target-arch. That appears to be nicely consistent

Indeed! That's another bonus I didn't think about.

[snowleopard]

I've implemented this and it works smoothly so far: 52ecf6c.

It's possible to rollback to the old naming convention without much difficulty if need be (please reopen the issue in this case).