On 5 August 2011 01:53, Simon Marlow <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/08/2011 21:22, David Terei wrote: >> >> On 3 August 2011 03:08, Simon Marlow<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Perhaps all packages should be trusted by default? (Perhaps with some >>> Cabal >>> configuration option to reverse the behaviour). After all, trusting a >>> package is a no-op unless the package defines some Safe or Trustworthy >>> modules. If we don't do this, then everyone has to explicitly type a >>> bunch >>> of 'ghc-pkg trust' commands to avoid compilation failure with Cabal >>> packages >>> that use Safe or 'import safe'. >> >> This seems a good change to me. What config option to reverse are you >> imagining though? i.e something in a .cabal file? Or a flag for >> cabal-install so i could type 'cabal install -no-trust regex-compat'? > > Ok, so the first thing is to add options to the configure and register > commands in Cabal, so that these work: > > runhaskell Setup.lhs configure -not-trusted > cabal configure -not-trusted > > and similarly 'cabal install -not-trusted' (that's in cabal-install). Then > there should be a default setting in cabal-install's configuration file, > which lives in ~/.cabal/config on Unix. >
Sure. Another question, the Haskell 2010 package. Some of the modules here are unsafe (e.g Foreign.ForeignPtr). My understanding is these packages are designed to strictly conform to the language specification. So should I leave Foreign.ForeignPtr alone and do nothing. Or its OK to create a Foreign.ForeignPtr.Safe module? I am assuming it wouldn't be OK to deprecate the unsafe methods in Foreign.ForeignPtr as this would require us first changing the Haskell language spec? Cheers, David _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
