Would it be better if cabal itself read the per-package local
#221: need a way to specify site-specific include and library search paths ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Reporter: guest | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Cabal library | Version: 1.2.3.0 Severity: normal | Resolution: Keywords: | Difficulty: easy (<4 hours) Ghcversion: 6.8.2 | Platform: Linux ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Comment (by duncan): Replying to [comment:3 guest]: preferences file, rather than the higher level cabal-install tool?
That way I could still get the benefits of recording local, per-package
file locations when I used cabal directly. The aim in the medium term is for cabal-install to be the primary command line interface. The way we have split things is that cabal-install maintains the state about configuration and what packages are available etc. Then the Cabal lib is basically a stateless API for dealing with packages. I'm reasonably satisfied this is a sensible design. -- Ticket URL: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/221#comment:4 Hackage http://haskell.org/cabal/ Hackage: Cabal and related projects