Re: Fwd: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
On 1/8/2013 2:04 PM, Alan Thompson wrote: Hello - Are you still active as the Cygwin emacs maintainer? There appears to be a clash between emacs and ctags as described below. Could you help us to resolve it? The clash involves xemacs. The xemacs maintainer said he would take care of it. You probably missed his reply because the discussion got moved to the cygiwn-apps list: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2012-12/msg00045.html Ken -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Fwd: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
The clash involves xemacs. The xemacs maintainer said he would take care of it. You probably missed his reply because the discussion got moved to the cygiwn-apps list: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2012-12/msg00045.html Ken OK - Thank you for the update. Alan -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
Hi - It looks like there has been no movement on this bug for a month. What is the best way to contact the emacs maintainers? It does not seem correct for emacs (or xemacs) to overwrite the ctags executable. Alan Thompson On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote: On 12/11/2012 13:05, Thrall, Bryan wrote: Yes, it looks like xemacs-tags and ctags packages both install /usr/bin/ctags.exe: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-grep.cgi?grep=ctags.exe Is there an especially good reason xemacs-tags can't depend on ctags, and get its ctags.exe from my package? Or, is there something special about Xemacs ctags that's worth preserving? Or, maybe ctags.exe should just be removed from the Xemacs package. Doesn't Emacs want you to use etags anyway? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
On 1/7/2013 2:56 PM, Alan Thompson wrote: Hi - It looks like there has been no movement on this bug for a month. What is the best way to contact the emacs maintainers? It does not seem correct for emacs (or xemacs) to overwrite the ctags executable. Actually, it's a little less than a month. ;-) The maintainer responded to it on December 12th. -- Larry _ A: Yes. Q: Are you sure? A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
[Redirected to cygwin-apps] On Dec 11 14:05, Thrall, Bryan wrote: Alan Thompson wrote on 2012-12-11: Looking at the link on StackOverflow (from 2010) it may be that the xemacs version of ctags is overwriting the default version in /bin. Could this be the culprit? Yes, it looks like xemacs-tags and ctags packages both install /usr/bin/ctags.exe: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-grep.cgi?grep=ctags.exe Oh boy, how long do we have this collisions? For years, it seems. FWIW, I'd prefer to keep Exuberant ctags since that's what is part of most Linux installations as well. Volker, would you mind a lot to obsolete the xemacs-tags package in favor of the ctags package? Thanks, Corinna On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Alan Thompson ... wrote: Hi - Yes, I'm sure: find /bin -name '*tags*' | xargs ls -ldF -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 85504 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ctags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 83968 Jan 31 2009 /bin/etags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 5411 Dec 21 2011 /bin/ocamltags* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 68608 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ootags.exe* ls -ldF /bin/ls /bin/vim /bin/gcc lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:20 /bin/gcc - /etc/alternatives/gcc* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 101902 Feb 6 2012 /bin/ls* lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:48 /bin/vim - /etc/alternatives/vim* uname -a CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW64 ALAN-THO-LAP 1.7.16(0.262/5/3) 2012-07-20 22:55 i686 Cygwin One can see from the timestamp on the links for gcc and vim that I installed Cygwin on 10/18/2012. However, it seems that both ctags and etags are old versions of the program (circa 2007) and are not the Exuberant Ctags version. However, the GNU documentation here: http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Exuberant_Ctags clearly lists the Exuberant Ctags, although it has only been updated as of 2004. However, looking here: http://cygwin.com/packages/ctags/ctags-5.8-1-src we see that cygwin has Exuberant Ctags 5.8. Perhaps it is just a packaging issue that caused the old one to be present and Exuberant Ctags 5.8 to be not present? You can see from this thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2634001/any-idea-why-ctags-wont- recurse-on-cygwin/13810472#13810472 that I'm not the only one who stumbled onto this problem. Where should we go from here? Could it just be a packaging problem? Alan Thompson On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Thrall, Bryan ... wrote: Are you sure you're using the ctags you think you are? $ ctags --help Exuberant Ctags 5.8, Copyright (C) 1996-2009 Darren Hiebert Compiled: Dec 11 2009, 11:42:40 Addresses: dhieb...@users.sourceforge.net, http://ctags.sourceforge.net Optional compiled features: +wildcards, +regex, +internal-sort Usage: ctags [options] [file(s)] snip -R Equivalent to --recurse. snip Hope this helps! -- Bryan Thrall
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
On 12/12/2012 02:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Oh boy, how long do we have this collisions? For years, it seems. There must be a database of package contents behind the packages search engine on sourceware. If someone that has access to that DB extracts a raw list of file names, this command will find the other duplicates: grep -o '/[a-z0-9]+\.exe$' filelist | sort | uniq -d Some will be harmless, like the two ksh.exe versions. But, maybe something interesting will turn up. Volker, would you mind a lot to obsolete the xemacs-tags package in favor of the ctags package? As long as Exuberant Ctags is a complete superset of the functionality in xemacs-tags, this seems like a good idea. Anything that depends on xemacs-tags can depend on the ctags package instead.
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
On 12/12/2012 10:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Oh boy, how long do we have this collisions? For years, it seems. I request a feature to detect package collision, and furthermore suggest which package to install when an user tries to run a program which is not installed but is available from a package. Such feature has been implemented in Ubuntu, for example: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/command-not-found-magic
RE: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
Jari Aalto wrote on 2012-12-12: On 2012-12-12 15:48, Aaron Schneider wrote: | On 12/12/2012 10:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote: | Oh boy, how long do we have this collisions? For years, it seems. | | I request a feature to detect package collision, and furthermore | suggest which package to install when an user tries to run a program | which is not installed but is available from a package. This helps: $ cygcheck --help ... -f, --find-package find the package to which FILE belongs $ cygcheck -f /usr/bin/ls coreutils-8.15-1 That only works on files whose package is installed, unfortunately. http://www.cygwin.com/packages is the tool to use for this. -- Bryan Thrall Principal Software Engineer FlightSafety International bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
Corinna Vinschen writes: Volker, would you mind a lot to obsolete the xemacs-tags package in favor of the ctags package? I will have a look on the weekend, Thanks, Corinna Ciao Volker
Re: ctags recursion broken?
On 12/11/2012 13:01, Alan Thompson wrote: Looking at the link on StackOverflow (from 2010) it may be that the xemacs version of ctags is overwriting the default version in /bin. Could this be the culprit? It's easy to find out: $ cygcheck -f /bin/ctags.exe You will either get back ctags-5.8-1 or the culprit. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
On 12/11/2012 13:05, Thrall, Bryan wrote: Yes, it looks like xemacs-tags and ctags packages both install /usr/bin/ctags.exe: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-grep.cgi?grep=ctags.exe Is there an especially good reason xemacs-tags can't depend on ctags, and get its ctags.exe from my package? Or, is there something special about Xemacs ctags that's worth preserving? Or, maybe ctags.exe should just be removed from the Xemacs package. Doesn't Emacs want you to use etags anyway? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken?
Hi - As a long-time user of Cygwin and Exuberant ctags, it seems that the current version of ctags on Cygwin is broken. Specifically, /bin/ctags -R . /bin/ctags: skipping .: it is not a regular file. Normally, ctags should recursively descend and process all files from the current directory. I downloaded version 5.8 of Exuberant Ctags from http://ctags.sourceforge.net/ and it works as expected. Upon closer inspection, it appears that Cygwin has a different version of ctags (not Exuberant Ctags!) that does not support recursion at all! Specifically, ctags -V ctags (standalone 21.4.22) Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is distributed under the terms in ETAGS.README ctags --help Usage: ctags [options] [[regex-option ...] file-name] ... These are the options accepted by ctags. You may use unambiguous abbreviations for the long option names. A - as file name means read names from stdin (one per line). Absolute names are stored in the output file as they are. Relative ones are stored relative to the output file's directory. snip -R, --no-regex Don't create tags from regexps for the following files. snip So the -R no longer means recursion, and there is no --recurse option. Given that Exuberant Ctags is distributed under the GPL and is very powerful, it seems that it would be prudent to include it in Cygwin. I could even volunteer to be the package maintainer, if desired. How should we proceed? Thank you, Alan Thompson -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
RE: ctags recursion broken?
Alan Thompson wrote on 2012-12-11: Upon closer inspection, it appears that Cygwin has a different version of ctags (not Exuberant Ctags!) that does not support recursion at all! Specifically, ctags -V ctags (standalone 21.4.22) Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is distributed under the terms in ETAGS.README ctags --help Usage: ctags [options] [[regex-option ...] file-name] ... These are the options accepted by ctags. You may use unambiguous abbreviations for the long option names. A - as file name means read names from stdin (one per line). Absolute names are stored in the output file as they are. Relative ones are stored relative to the output file's directory. snip -R, --no-regex Don't create tags from regexps for the following files. snip Are you sure you're using the ctags you think you are? $ ctags --help Exuberant Ctags 5.8, Copyright (C) 1996-2009 Darren Hiebert Compiled: Dec 11 2009, 11:42:40 Addresses: dhieb...@users.sourceforge.net, http://ctags.sourceforge.net Optional compiled features: +wildcards, +regex, +internal-sort Usage: ctags [options] [file(s)] snip -R Equivalent to --recurse. snip Hope this helps! -- Bryan Thrall Principal Software Engineer FlightSafety International bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken?
Hi - Yes, I'm sure: find /bin -name '*tags*' | xargs ls -ldF -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 85504 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ctags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 83968 Jan 31 2009 /bin/etags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 5411 Dec 21 2011 /bin/ocamltags* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 68608 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ootags.exe* ls -ldF /bin/ls /bin/vim /bin/gcc lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:20 /bin/gcc - /etc/alternatives/gcc* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 101902 Feb 6 2012 /bin/ls* lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:48 /bin/vim - /etc/alternatives/vim* uname -a CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW64 ALAN-THO-LAP 1.7.16(0.262/5/3) 2012-07-20 22:55 i686 Cygwin One can see from the timestamp on the links for gcc and vim that I installed Cygwin on 10/18/2012. However, it seems that both ctags and etags are old versions of the program (circa 2007) and are not the Exuberant Ctags version. However, the GNU documentation here: http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Exuberant_Ctags clearly lists the Exuberant Ctags, although it has only been updated as of 2004. However, looking here: http://cygwin.com/packages/ctags/ctags-5.8-1-src we see that cygwin has Exuberant Ctags 5.8. Perhaps it is just a packaging issue that caused the old one to be present and Exuberant Ctags 5.8 to be not present? You can see from this thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2634001/any-idea-why-ctags-wont-recurse-on-cygwin/13810472#13810472 that I'm not the only one who stumbled onto this problem. Where should we go from here? Could it just be a packaging problem? Alan Thompson On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Thrall, Bryan bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com wrote: Are you sure you're using the ctags you think you are? $ ctags --help Exuberant Ctags 5.8, Copyright (C) 1996-2009 Darren Hiebert Compiled: Dec 11 2009, 11:42:40 Addresses: dhieb...@users.sourceforge.net, http://ctags.sourceforge.net Optional compiled features: +wildcards, +regex, +internal-sort Usage: ctags [options] [file(s)] snip -R Equivalent to --recurse. snip Hope this helps! -- Bryan Thrall Principal Software Engineer FlightSafety International bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: ctags recursion broken?
Looking at the link on StackOverflow (from 2010) it may be that the xemacs version of ctags is overwriting the default version in /bin. Could this be the culprit? Alan Thompson On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Alan Thompson thompson2...@gmail.com wrote: Hi - Yes, I'm sure: find /bin -name '*tags*' | xargs ls -ldF -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 85504 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ctags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 83968 Jan 31 2009 /bin/etags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 5411 Dec 21 2011 /bin/ocamltags* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 68608 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ootags.exe* ls -ldF /bin/ls /bin/vim /bin/gcc lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:20 /bin/gcc - /etc/alternatives/gcc* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 101902 Feb 6 2012 /bin/ls* lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:48 /bin/vim - /etc/alternatives/vim* uname -a CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW64 ALAN-THO-LAP 1.7.16(0.262/5/3) 2012-07-20 22:55 i686 Cygwin One can see from the timestamp on the links for gcc and vim that I installed Cygwin on 10/18/2012. However, it seems that both ctags and etags are old versions of the program (circa 2007) and are not the Exuberant Ctags version. However, the GNU documentation here: http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Exuberant_Ctags clearly lists the Exuberant Ctags, although it has only been updated as of 2004. However, looking here: http://cygwin.com/packages/ctags/ctags-5.8-1-src we see that cygwin has Exuberant Ctags 5.8. Perhaps it is just a packaging issue that caused the old one to be present and Exuberant Ctags 5.8 to be not present? You can see from this thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2634001/any-idea-why-ctags-wont-recurse-on-cygwin/13810472#13810472 that I'm not the only one who stumbled onto this problem. Where should we go from here? Could it just be a packaging problem? Alan Thompson On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Thrall, Bryan bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com wrote: Are you sure you're using the ctags you think you are? $ ctags --help Exuberant Ctags 5.8, Copyright (C) 1996-2009 Darren Hiebert Compiled: Dec 11 2009, 11:42:40 Addresses: dhieb...@users.sourceforge.net, http://ctags.sourceforge.net Optional compiled features: +wildcards, +regex, +internal-sort Usage: ctags [options] [file(s)] snip -R Equivalent to --recurse. snip Hope this helps! -- Bryan Thrall Principal Software Engineer FlightSafety International bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
RE: ctags recursion broken? [ATTN: ctags, xemacs-tags maintainers]
Alan Thompson wrote on 2012-12-11: Looking at the link on StackOverflow (from 2010) it may be that the xemacs version of ctags is overwriting the default version in /bin. Could this be the culprit? Yes, it looks like xemacs-tags and ctags packages both install /usr/bin/ctags.exe: http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-grep.cgi?grep=ctags.exe On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Alan Thompson thompson2...@gmail.com wrote: Hi - Yes, I'm sure: find /bin -name '*tags*' | xargs ls -ldF -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 85504 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ctags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 83968 Jan 31 2009 /bin/etags.exe* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 5411 Dec 21 2011 /bin/ocamltags* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 68608 Jan 31 2009 /bin/ootags.exe* ls -ldF /bin/ls /bin/vim /bin/gcc lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:20 /bin/gcc - /etc/alternatives/gcc* -rwxr-xr-x 1 alathompson Domain Users 101902 Feb 6 2012 /bin/ls* lrwxrwxrwx 1 alathompson Domain Users 21 Oct 18 12:48 /bin/vim - /etc/alternatives/vim* uname -a CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW64 ALAN-THO-LAP 1.7.16(0.262/5/3) 2012-07-20 22:55 i686 Cygwin One can see from the timestamp on the links for gcc and vim that I installed Cygwin on 10/18/2012. However, it seems that both ctags and etags are old versions of the program (circa 2007) and are not the Exuberant Ctags version. However, the GNU documentation here: http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Exuberant_Ctags clearly lists the Exuberant Ctags, although it has only been updated as of 2004. However, looking here: http://cygwin.com/packages/ctags/ctags-5.8-1-src we see that cygwin has Exuberant Ctags 5.8. Perhaps it is just a packaging issue that caused the old one to be present and Exuberant Ctags 5.8 to be not present? You can see from this thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2634001/any-idea-why-ctags-wont- recurse-on-cygwin/13810472#13810472 that I'm not the only one who stumbled onto this problem. Where should we go from here? Could it just be a packaging problem? Alan Thompson On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Thrall, Bryan bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com wrote: Are you sure you're using the ctags you think you are? $ ctags --help Exuberant Ctags 5.8, Copyright (C) 1996-2009 Darren Hiebert Compiled: Dec 11 2009, 11:42:40 Addresses: dhieb...@users.sourceforge.net, http://ctags.sourceforge.net Optional compiled features: +wildcards, +regex, +internal-sort Usage: ctags [options] [file(s)] snip -R Equivalent to --recurse. snip Hope this helps! -- Bryan Thrall Principal Software Engineer FlightSafety International bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com -- Bryan Thrall Principal Software Engineer FlightSafety International bryan.thr...@flightsafety.com -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
