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 21:39:36 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20220411124736.3qijvtearh6wlen7.ref@Ergus> <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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30596"; 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 21:41:34 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 1ndzuo-0007pO-Ba for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 21:41:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54296 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndzum-0007hr-Uu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:41:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52552) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndzt8-00069I-0K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:39:50 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]:42717) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndzt2-0005Gy-Ok; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:39:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20220411191933.wyxvmgpyd4hnpfc2@Ergus> (Ergus's message of "Mon, 11 Apr 2022 21:19:33 +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:288244 Archived-At: >>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022, Ergus wrote: > Now? > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac > index 185e4d0862..ace80aed56 100644 > --- a/configure.ac > +++ b/configure.ac > @@ -267,6 +267,19 @@ AC_DEFUN > fi > AC_SUBST([with_mailutils]) > +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? In its current form, it would break installation of the Gentoo package (or require us adding an explicit --without-ctags). > + 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.