Dmitry Bogatov wrote on Tue, 05 Feb 2019 16:15 +0000: > > [2019-02-03 13:39] Daniel Shahaf <danie...@apache.org> > > However, do note that some upstreams ship completion files that are > > inferior to those that ship with zsh itself. In such cases it would be > > desirable *not* to install the upstream's completion into the default > > fpath (`/usr/bin/zsh -fc 'typeset -p fpath'`). > > If upstream provides {foo}.zsh_completion file, how can I compare it > with zsh proper? Invoke `dpkg -L zsh-common|grep foo' and compare file > length? Or something more elaborate?
That could be a first approximation. However, the completion shipped with zsh may be spread across multiple files (Command/_foo and Types/_foo_thingies) or be in a differently-named file (the completion for groupmod(8) is in _user_admin, the completion of latexmk(1) is in tex(1), ...), and I haven't said a word yet about whether {foo}.zsh_completion uses more advanced features such as tags, descriptions, and matchspecs. In short, I don't have a rule of thumb for you. What I can say with certainty is that if both zsh and foo upstream provide completion for foo, a bug report against either or both would be worthwhile so as to reduce duplication of effort. HTH, Daniel