Re: [PATCH] etags support

["Derek R. Price" <derek dot price at openavenue dot com>]

Tom Tromey wrote:

> >>>>> "Derek" == Derek R Price <derek.price@openavenue.com> writes:
>
> Hmm.  I'm running RH 6.2 and /usr/bin/etags is the GNU version:

I just looked into it and it looks like etags was distributed with the
version of emacs (20.5) that was distributed with RedHat 6.2.  They've
removed it from the emacs package since and by default install the ctags
package which contains Exuberent ctags, which doubles as an etags
implementation.  It turns out I upgraded to RedHat 7.0 and forgot.  :)


> I don't mind supporting some other version of tags, but I think it
> would be easiest if we just introduced a new target.

[snip]


> The `--lang=none' thing is definitely specific to the Emacs etags.
> That must appear in your Makefile.am though -- meaning that your
> Makefile.am was written to work with the Emacs etags.  This isn't an
> uncommon practice, either.

'--lang=<x>' isn't though.  Exuberent ctags looks like it was trying to
mimic the original.  Not sure why there are differences.


> Adding configure machinery for this seems like overkill.

I'm still not so sure about that.  The targets are extremely similiar and
the output file has the same name and is in the same format.  In theory,
both programs should produce identical output, with the '--lang=none'
exception noted above.

Derek
--
Derek Price                      CVS Solutions Architect (
http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:dprice@openavenue.com     OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
Always glad to share my ignorance - I've got plenty.