cabal-install: do not pass the executable name to cabal external commands

[MangoIV]

Previously the executable name of the external command was passed to external commands as the first argument.

This behaviour was adapated from cargo which does this because of reasons that are internal to rust that do not affect GHC Haskell, and are even orthogonal to patterns that see common use in Haskell.

Additionally, it complicates the 'simple' case which is what we should optimize for when building such a feature.

The previous use case (one executable that serves multiple external subcommands) is still possible by the following means:

• using a wrapper around the executable
• using a symlink and check argv[0] in the executable

---

Include the following checklist in your PR:

• Patches conform to the coding conventions.
• Any changes that could be relevant to users have been recorded in the changelog.
  • Is the change significant? If so, remember to add significance: significant in the changelog file.
• The documentation has been updated, if necessary.
• Manual QA notes have been included.
• Tests have been added. (Ask for help if you don’t know how to write them! Ask for an exemption if tests are too complex for too little coverage!)

[geekosaur]

There's an issue here which hasn't been brought up yet, which is one of the reasons the program name is passed as the first parameter.

See the caveat on getProgName. On Windows in particular, there is no way to retrieve argv[0], so anything relying on it will have issues.

This also plays into a potential future change where invocation via cabal would be marked. (Likely by something like how login on Unix marks login shells: leading '-'.) The reason we would want this is the potential for future versions of the external command mechanism to receive bits of project or cabal state via the environment. (We already pass $CABAL / %CABAL%, but tooling should already use that to ensure they are running the right cabal.) External commands would need some "key" indicating that the additional information is available. We don't do this yet because we're waiting for feedback from users of the external command mechanism about what information they would need from cabal.

All of which means I'm not sure we can get away with not passing the name. At minimum, we might need to replace it with a --run-from-cabal parameter or other mechanism to indicate that additional information is available, and potentially parameterized by the actual run name to work around getProgName issues on non-POSIX (which would put us right back where we are now).

[MangoIV]

There are two possible workarounds listed, the other one (just using multiple executables) even aligns very nicely with how Haskell projects are usually structured and doesn't incur a lot of overhead. Does that one not work on windows either?

On the topic of getting more information: if you're setting an environment variable anyway, then why is it not possible to just check for the presence of that variable?

[geekosaur]

$CABAL itself isn't enough, as other tools already use it for this purpose. A separate envar might be.

If two tools share most of their implementation, multiple driver programs are possible but may lead to complex library entry points. This is why Unix likes to use (sym)links in that case, but that doesn't fly on Windows and probably other OSes that aren't Unix-like (there's ongoing work to port ghc and build tools to Haiku, for example).

[geekosaur]

You haven't updated the external command tests (PackageTests/ExternalCommandExitCode/cabal.test.hs, PackageTests/ExternalCommand/cabal.test.hs, PackageTests/ExternalCommandHelp/cabal.test.hs).

[MangoIV]

You haven't updated the external command test

I didn't see it failing locally, must've slipped through the one million lines of output

If two tools share most of their implementation, multiple driver programs are possible but may lead to complex library entry points.

That's why I said in Haskell, it is super common to make the executable just a shim that invokes the library. In my opinion we don't have too look too closely what other people are doing there because they have other backgrounds. The default case is that it's very simple to add new executables to Haskell projects and even if that's not a case, for that hypothetical project (I know of none that has this problem) it's not a hurdle that big that should force other users to take the hurdles that they have to take now. (Or making anything impossible)

$CABAL itself isn't enough, as other tools already use it for this purpose. A separate envar might be.

Yes, I propose not setting that variable and instead use a longer, more rarely used one like $CABAL_EXTERNAL_COMMAND_CONTEXT which at the same time would be good to avoid executables that currently long for $CABAL to break.

[geekosaur]

Yes, I propose not setting that variable and instead use a longer, more rarely used one like $CABAL_EXTERNAL_COMMAND_CONTEXT which at the same time would be good to avoid executables that currently long for $CABAL to break.

We still need to set it, because if a user runs a different cabal than the default on on $PATH (I do this somewhat regularly, for example) we need to inform the external command which one to use to e.g. query project information. $CABAL is the standard for this.

[Bodigrim]

We still need to set it, because if a user runs a different cabal than the default on on $PATH (I do this somewhat regularly, for example) we need to inform the external command which one to use to e.g. query project information. $CABAL is the standard for this.

I doubt it's ever wise to use $CABAL to query project information or similar. Why would anyone do it? Cabal CLI interface isn't stable, and certainly running a new process, checking its version and parsing the output is too much work, when you can simply use cabal-install as a library instead.

[geekosaur]

That may tie your program to a specific version. In the opposite direction, this is why I think we'll be exporting more information in the future. Also, future versions of cabal will have more stable interfaces for this, whose design will come from this and other users (e.g. HLS); we already have a ticket and some early design work for a proposed cabal status, and some work on extending cabal path.

[MangoIV]

Do I understand this incorrectly though: I think this is orthogonal to the issue at hand - the additional argument wouldn't carry any information about the status of cabal, it would be the environment variable.

[geekosaur]

If the additional parameter were to stay, it would be the same as the argv[0] which isn't always accessible on non-Unix. It might instead be shifted into the environment.

[geekosaur]

Some care is needed with the environment, though; it's already pretty sizable on some systems, and there is a limit on argv+envp on anything other than FreeBSD.

[Bodigrim]

That may tie your program to a specific version.

Which is something under mine control as a developer, so it's good. While with $CABAL I have no idea what I'm dealing with: what is the version? was it patched somehow? can I execute it as a child process without hitting a lock of some sort? As a third-party developer, I'm very certain about my preference here. But we digress.

[mniip]

There's an issue here which hasn't been brought up yet, which is one of the reasons the program name is passed as the first parameter.

See the caveat on getProgName. On Windows in particular, there is no way to retrieve argv[0], so anything relying on it will have issues.

I feel like you're severily misunderstanding the docs here. getProgName works on windows like a charm, in the sense that it outputs the filename of the program as it appeared in the first word in the CreateProcess invocation (i.e. pre symlink resolution).

Here's what it looks like:

PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> cat .\GetProgName.hs
import System.Environment

main :: IO ()
main = getProgName >>= putStrLn
PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> ghc .\GetProgName.hs -o cabal-getprogname.exe
[2 of 2] Linking cabal-getprogname.exe
PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> New-Item -Path cabal-getprogname-symlink.exe -ItemType SymbolicLink -Value cabal-getprogname.exe


    Directory: C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog


Mode                 LastWriteTime         Length Name
----                 -------------         ------ ----
-a---l         10/1/2025  11:05 PM              0 cabal-getprogname-symlink.exe


PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> fsutil hardlink create cabal-getprogname-hardlink.exe cabal-getprogname.exe
Hard link created for C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog\cabal-getprogname-hardlink.exe <<===>> C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog\cabal-getprogname.exe
PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> cabal getprogname
cabal-getprogname.exe
PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> cabal getprogname-symlink
cabal-getprogname-symlink.exe
PS C:\Users\mniip\Desktop\prog> cabal getprogname-hardlink
cabal-getprogname-hardlink.exe

[geekosaur]

I feel like you're severily misunderstanding the docs here. getProgName works on windows like a charm, in the sense that it outputs the filename of the program as it appeared in the first word in the CreateProcess invocation (i.e. pre symlink resolution).

It still leaves out cabal-specific changes to it to indicate that it has been run from cabal and extra information may be available (#11232 (review)); it only provides the executable name that was run.

[mniip]

It still leaves out cabal-specific changes to it to indicate that it has been run from cabal and extra information may be available (#11232 (review)); it only provides the executable name that was run.

Yes. This is a completely orthogonal issue though to whether cabal copies the command name in argv[1] or not. This PR isn't about making the perfect cabal external commands system, it's about changing that one specific aspect.

[ulysses4ever]

Thank you for submitting the patch @MangoIV! I agree with your arguments and I wasn't able to discern serious counter-arguments from the discussion above. So I'm in support of the change.

Why is it a draft?

[MangoIV]

Why is it a draft?

There's two missing checkboxes that I haven't gone through yet (I want to adjust missing docs)

[geekosaur]

You still also have a typo in your changelog entry and two tests that still need to be fixed (I saw only one fixed in the last push).

[MangoIV]

yeah that's also why it's still draft, sorry. I will of course go through this. :)

[ulysses4ever]

No worries, I was just making sure it's not an oversight.