Re: [PATCH] Re: etags name collision.

[Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org>]

>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022, Ergus  wrote:

>> But then the test should be more specific, and check if there would be a
>> file collision at the actual target location (with the name modified by
>> --program-transform-name, if applicable). If there's no collision (e.g.
>> Emacs ctags has a different name) then Emacs should install it.

> If we don't do that with mailutils why should we do it with ctags...
> It will be more complex and error prone.

Because it's a different problem. The mailutils flag is there because of
security concerns with the bundled movemail. There is no file collision
in that case, because Emacs doesn't install its movemail program in
/usr/bin but in /usr/libexec/emacs/.

> I would be even simpler and just add the option --without-ctags to not
> build our ctags on demand unconditionally, keeping things as they are
> now by default.

Right. The test doesn't add much value (if any).

> as a plus we could make: --with-ctags=no, to not build; and we could
> allow to do things like: --with-ctags=ctags.emacs to explicitly create
> it as ctags.emacs... But I am sure such method will break some standard
> or development agreement.

Way too complicated IMHO.