From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ulrich Mueller Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: etags name collision. Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 23:04:56 +0200 Message-ID: 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14943"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ergus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 11 23:06:10 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 1ne1Eg-0003kE-7u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 23:06:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53650 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne1Ef-0001m7-6s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 17:06:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45530) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne1De-00012H-GA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 17:05:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gentoo.org ([2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]:50613 helo=smtp.gentoo.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ne1Db-0002jE-RC; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 17:05:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20220411195350.7jhugti3e3vng6yx@Ergus> (Ergus's message of "Mon, 11 Apr 2022 21:53:50 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4; envelope-from=ulm@gentoo.org; helo=smtp.gentoo.org X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:288249 Archived-At: >>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022, Ergus wrote: >>> +AC_ARG_WITH([ctags], >>> + [AS_HELP_STRING([--with-ctags], >>> + [rely on System ctags; this is the default if Universal ctags or >>> + Exuberant ctags is installed])], >>> + [], >>> + [with_ctags=$with_features >>> + if test "$with_ctags" = yes; then >>> + (ctags --version | grep "GNU Emacs") 2>/dev/null || with_ctags=no >> >> Shouldn't this use the actual name under which Emacs will install ctags? >> That is, respect AC_ARG_PROGRAM? >> > Not needed, if it uses a different name there is no collision, so the > test is not needed. If universal ctags is installed as "ctags", above test would detect that the installed version is not Emacs ctags. So, installation of ctags by Emacs would be suppressed, even if it was under a different name. Or am I missing something here? > The option --with-ctags means rely on System ctags. I don't think you > need anything new. Universal ctags isn't more "system" than Emacs. They're both packages. (Again, this is from a distro point of view.)