On Sat, Jan 17, 2026 at 11:56:20AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Gavin Smith <[email protected]> > > Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 16:58:13 +0000 > > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > > > > > IOW, this warning was expected, but was missing. I see that this > > > warning comes from texi2any.c:merge_opened_files, but I don't know how > > > to investigate the reason(s) -- any hints? > > > > It should not come from texi2any.c because that is the alternative > > ctexi2any implementation that is not used by default. > > Oh, so the "--enable-c-texi2any" configure-time option defaults to > "no", not to "detect"? I thought it defaults to "detect", because > "./configure --help" says "Use texi2any program implemented in C if > possible", and I see ctexi2any.exe was built as part of the build, so > evidently that _was_ possible.
Indeed, whether ctexi2any.exe can be build is detected. "--enable-c-texi2any" is not about building ctexi2any, but whether it is this implementaiton of texi2any rather than the Perl one that it used in tests and is installed. There is no "detect" value for this option, actually, as it does not make sense. I think that it is the --help message that is misleading. What about: "Use texi2any program implemented in C if built" > Then why isn't it used by the test > suite (and not installed, as I say in my previous message)? For now, we prefer testing and installing the Perl implementation. The speed difference is minimal, and the Perl implementation is better tested. As long as there is a need of Perl for indices sorting, the two implementations are gonna be similar. -- Pat
