On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 10:05:26AM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 08:58:38PM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > [...] > > One of the questions is whether we gain a lot by making this an option. > > If packagers have to manually adapt the location they could just as well > > copy the file by hand as there is no build step involved in the first > > place. I also think that for Bash and zsh the locations are somewhat > > stable across distros these days, so ideally we could just build on that > > and not even provide an option in the first place? > > > > I'm mostly trying to avoid to eventually end up with tons of build > > options. Ideally, we should just do the right thing and install the > > completion scripts into the correct location in the specified prefix. > > > > At least if we can get away with it. It seems like the default location > > would work alright for you on Fedora, and I assume that it would work > > alright for most of the other distros. So I'd refrain from introducing > > an option now, but if we eventually figure out that this is problematic > > on some distro then we can still introduce the option at a later point > > in time. > > Yeah, if the locations are the same across all of the > systems we aim to support are consistent, then I agree > there's not a lot of point making it configurable. > > Whether that turns out to be the case or not will be > interesting. It seems like there are almost always a few > systems that do things differently for one reason or > another. With luck, this is an exception. > > >> For reference, here are the locations for bash, fish, and > >> zsh which Fedora uses. This might be helpful in determining > >> reasonable defaults (after comparing to other distributions, > >> of course): > >> > >> bash /usr/share/bash-completion/completions > >> fish /usr/share/fish/vendor_completions.d > >> zsh /usr/share/zsh/site-functions > > > > We don't have completions for the Fish shell, right? Just making sure > > that I don't miss the obvious. > > Heh, we don't -- as far as I know either. :) > > Those three just happen to be the shells which have a > packaging macro for the path in Fedora. > > Cheers, I've sent a patch via [1] now. Thanks! Patrick [1]: <20250407-b4-pks-meson-install-completions-v1-1-8a7eb8b9284b@xxxxxx>
