Hi Jani,
Thank you for the suggestion regarding shtab.
On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 12:10:27PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> The alternative would be to make the tool more friendly to existing
> completion tools such as shtab [1]. Since the kernel as a project is
> really averse to adding external dependencies, you could take shtab's
> CLI approach, and commit the completion script in the repo. Only
> whoever's updating the completions would have to install and run shtab.
I understand your point about avoiding homebrew solutions, however, a main
benefit of this approach is that the completion script does not need to be
regenerated or updated manually.
Using shtab would introduce a new dependency and maintenance where the
static completion script could easily get out of sync.
So I would like to proceed with the current approach.
> And the whole thing could be taken a step further, adding, say,
> tools/completions/{bash,zsh,tcsh,...} directories for all the kernel
> tool completions instead of spreading them around.
I agree that centralizing completions is a good idea. So it would be better
handled as a separate future effort because it is a tree-wide
reorganization.
Regards,
Ryota Sakamoto
