On 100828 18:32, Guillaume Rousse wrote: > However, I'd like us to decide on a final setup, that would be: > 1) FHS-compliant > 2) efficient in term of time spent to source files at each new bash > process start (that's the initial goal of distinguishing between > installation and activation directory) > 3) enforced by our installation process (we currently hardcode > /etc/bash_completion.d in bash_completion file, instead of relying on > installation process to set it according to --sysconfdir variable) > 4) avoid conveniancy symlinks, as the one we're just discussing here > > That is supposed to be a 2.0 release objective, after all.
Yes, it would be nice if could tackle this and now incorporate any `helpers' directory in it. What if we would create an environment variable `BASHCOMP_PATH' (prefix is going to be `bashcomp_' isn't it?), containing colon-separated (:) directories. Each of these directories should contain mandatory directories, being: - completions (the renamed `contrib') - helpers BASHCOMP_PATH typically would contain these directories: /usr/share/bash-completion /etc/bash_completion.d/ ~/bash_completion.d but allows for each distribution to vary. I'm not sure how we would incorporate per-user config settings. Maybe bash_completion could look in each of the BASHCOMP_PATH directories for a `bash_completion' or `.bashcomprc' file? If we would first agree on BASHCOMP_PATH, we could then second decide on how BASHCOMP_PATH should be set up by an installer. Thoughts? > > I'm hesitating to add yet another configuration variable, especially > > since contrib & helpers are so tied together (we would also need a > > BASH_COMPLETION_COMPAT_DIR_HELPER, ugh). > I still don't know what's this variable is for, BTW. I was thinking if BASH_COMPLETION_DIR/contrib gets a `helpers' dir with a variable pointing to it, then BASH_COMPLETION_COMPAT_DIR/contrib would need one as well. > So, I'm absolutly OK for another symlink as a temporary solution, but > I'd prefer to achieve our long-time objective as well. And if testing > has specific issues, I'd prefer them to be solved by test-time only > solutions/hacks/whatever than permanent setup ones. Let's add the symlink then until we decide on a final setup. I'm fine with adjusting the test suite, but I also expect people - just like me - running bash_completion directly from git HEAD without doing a `make', and I think it would be better if we can defer `make' substitutions to the install phase so that the bash_completion source stays simpler. Greetings, Freddy Vulto http://fvue.nl _______________________________________________ Bash-completion-devel mailing list Bash-completion-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/bash-completion-devel