From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: etags name collision. Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 05:28:33 +0300 Message-ID: <835ynf592m.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20220411124736.3qijvtearh6wlen7@Ergus> <83pmln69n0.fsf@gnu.org> <20220411134749.ps6g5ulpbamzm6ot@Ergus> <83k0bv679q.fsf@gnu.org> <20220411154635.qfw2ijpdahiv5ctl@Ergus> <83fsmj62jl.fsf@gnu.org> <20220411161942.xsqr3ekorpm6jf6y@Ergus> <83ee2360aq.fsf@gnu.org> <20220411191933.wyxvmgpyd4hnpfc2@Ergus> <20220411195350.7jhugti3e3vng6yx@Ergus> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26029"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ulm@gentoo.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ergus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 12 04:29:48 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ne6Hr-0006fh-Pw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 04:29:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51766 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne6Hq-0002M5-8M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:29:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58766) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne6Go-0001ac-4s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:28:42 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55910) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne6Gd-0004fL-28; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:28:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=WSPLVEB/+OJ+9fy3tVfvbTsRfSC0Sgk6nVOt9lqEs4k=; b=UlK3J6E3i7QA FVjBqJj4G0ChflEiE2tkoAsMBFaqumwQC0ROcHdpestyLGxmRUz4PwYKCLNvHrON5Y6ji6bgQ6kTu bgddPTWvljbDhoYvhoxfjslPDes/4HJgODjN+YWKAzn8y6bZcmhnvkF2WGIBh9Yskq5jUVN/l4aqG CY2VZv/LPve3TpiQuff9lIdRWcodYruCIo5JVTBYN/3KU45mnARelxOSAkWQcCMVkNqAyWwChg8xM M/PKR9aeb7ks6pp6f8U2W/BemWdL1kst0qiprWZHIf4WtqhpYWDibmCPXF6Y7J5PUG4ypW8q962Yv +uX1AY0bNqV1OJ7huBkpJQ==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2401 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne6Gb-0003CH-SH; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:28:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20220411195350.7jhugti3e3vng6yx@Ergus> (message from Ergus on Mon, 11 Apr 2022 21:53:50 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:288259 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 21:53:50 +0200 > From: Ergus > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > >> + fi]) > >> +if test "$with_ctags" = no; then > >> + with_ctags= > >> +fi > > > >I still think that any test for an installed binary is a bad idea, from > >a distro point of view. Note that distros typically build packages in an > >environment that is different from the one of the final target system. > > > Here I agree How else to test whether this is needed? I'm okay with having "--without-ctags" with no test, but then the default will have to be to install our ctags. With the test, we could refrain from installing it if the test says so. I'm also okay with leaving things as they are now, obviously, if this change brings more problems than it solves. I don't consider the current situation bad enough to necessitate any changes.