stack.yaml vs cabal package file¶
Due to their apparent overlap, the purpose of the following three files can be unclear:
- A cabal package file, e.g.
The last two are easy to explain:
package.yaml is a file format supported by
hpack. It adds some niceties on top of
cabal. For example, hpack has YAML syntax support and will automatically
exposed-modules lists. However, it's just a frontend to cabal
package files. So for this document, we're instead going to focus on the first
two and try to answer:
What's the difference between a
stack.yaml file and a cabal package file?
Package versus project¶
Cabal is a build system, which is used by Stack. Cabal defines the concept of a package. A package has:
- A name and version
- 0 or 1 libraries
- 0 or more executables
- A cabal file (or, as mentioned above, an hpack
package.yamlthat generates a cabal file)
- And a bunch more
The second to last bullet bears repeating: there's a 1-to-1 correspondence between packages and cabal files.
Stack is a build tool that works on top of the Cabal build system, and defines a new concept called a project. A project has:
- A resolver, which tells it about a snapshot (more on this later)
- Extra dependencies on top of the snapshot
- 0 or more local Cabal packages
- Flag and GHC options configurations
- And a bunch more Stack configuration
A source of confusion is that, often, you'll have a project that defines
exactly one package you're working on, and in that situation it's unclear why,
for example, you need to specify an extra depedency in both your
and cabal file. To explain, let's take a quick detour to talk about snapshots
and how Stack resolves dependencies.
Resolvers and snapshots¶
Stack follows a rule that says, for any projects, there is precisely 1 version
of each package available. Obviously there are many versions of many
different packages available in the world. But when resolving a
file, Stack requires that you have chosen a specific version for each package
The most common means by which this set of packages is defined is via a
Stackage Snapshot. For example, if you go to the page
https://www.stackage.org/lts-10.2, you will see a list of 2,666 packages at
specific version numbers. When you then specify
resolver: lts-10.2, you're
telling Stack to use those package versions in resolving dependencies down to
concrete version numbers.
Sometimes a snapshot doesn't have all of the packages you want. Or you want a
different version. Or you want to work on a local modification of a package. In
all of those cases, you can add more configuration data to your
override the values it received from your
resolver setting. At the end of the
day, each of your projects will end up with some way of resolving a package
name into a concrete version number.
Why specify deps twice?¶
When you add something like this to your
extra-deps: - acme-missiles-0.3
What you're saying to Stack is: if at any point you find that you need to build
acme-missiles package, please use version
0.3. You are not saying
acme-missiles now." You are also not saying "my package depends
acme-missiles." You are simply making it available should the need arise.
When you add
build-depends: acme-missiles to your cabal file or
dependencies: [acme-missiles] to your
package.yaml file, you're saying
"this package requires that
acme-missiles be available." Since
acme-missiles doesn't appear in your snapshot, without also modifying your
stack.yaml to mention it via
extra-deps, Stack will complain about the
dependency being unavailable.
You may challenge: but why go through all of that annoyance? Stack knows what
package I want, why not just go grab it? The answer is that, if Stack just
acme-missiles for you without it being specified in the
somehow, you'd lose reproducibility. How would Stack know which version to use?
It may elect to use the newest version, but if a new version is available in
the future, will it automatically switch to that?
Stack's baseline philosophy is that build plans are always reproducible*. The
purpose of the
stack.yaml file is to define an immutable set of packages. No
matter when in time you use it, and no matter how many new release happen in
the interim, the build plan generated should be the same.
* There's at least one hole in this theory today, which is Hackage revisions.
When you specify
extra-deps: [acme-missiles-0.3], it doesn't specify which
revision of the cabal file to use, and Stack will just choose the latest. Stack
version 1.6 added the ability to specify exact revisions of cabal files, but
this isn't enforced as a requirement as it's so different from the way most
people work with packages.
And now, how about the other side: why doesn't Stack automatically add
build-depends in your cabal file if you add it as an
extra-dep? There are a surprising number reasons actually:
- The cabal spec doesn't support anything like that
- There can be multiple packages in a project, and how do we know which package actually needs the dependency?
- There can be multiple components (libraries, executable, etc) in a package, and how do we know which of those actually needs the dependency?
- The dependency may only be conditionally needed, based on flags, OS, or architecture. As an extreme example, we wouldn't want a Linux-only package to be force-built on Windows.
While for simple use cases it seems like automatically adding dependencies from
the cabal file to the
stack.yaml file or vice-versa would be a good thing, it
breaks down immediately for any semi-difficult case. Therefore, Stack requires
you to add it to both places.
And a final note, in case it wasn't clear. The example I gave above used
acme-missiles, which is not in Stackage snapshots. If, however, you want to
depend on a package already present in the snapshot you've selected, there's no
need to add it explicitly to your
stack.yaml file: it's already there
implicitly via the
resolver setting. This is what you do the majority of the
time, such as when you add
mtl as a
Should I check in generated cabal files?¶
Yes, you should. This recommendation was changed in issue #5210, please see the discussion there.