Dnia 2014-08-03, o godz. 07:18:42 Samuli Suominen napisa³(a): > > On 02/08/14 12:23, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > El mar, 29-07-2014 a las 21:22 +0200, Micha³ Górny escribió: > >> Dnia 2014-07-29, o godz. 14:06:18 > >> Pacho Ramos napisa³(a): > >> > >>> Would like to ask for action about how to finally handle bash-completion > >>> on Gentoo. Looks like we are using a different approach as upstream to > >>> handle completions now, there was a try (one year ago) to try to switch > >>> to upstream style but seems that the revision implementing that was > >>> later dropped due some arguments. > >> Just to be clear, the arguments were not due to new bash-completion > >> itself but due to lack of completeness and documentation. If I recall > >> correctly, it was reverted simply because nobody was willing to do > >> the remaining work and we had no real documentation for the new system. > >> In other words, users upgraded, completions stopped working and didn't > >> know why or how to proceed. > >> > >> I don't know if the Council needs to say anything here. It's just > >> a matter of doing the work. > >> > > Yeah, I have seen new comments in relevant bug report and looks like > > that was the case. Sorry for the misunderstanding. There is no need to > > include it in agenda then > > So I guess it's more about the eselect module, and allowing it to move > specific > bash-completion files to temporary directory, making them out-of-scope for > the bash-completion autoloader (yes, there is an autoloader) that mimics > the outcome of putting specific bash-completion files to INSTALL_MASK Wouldn't it be better to generate exclude commands in bashrc? -- Best regards, Micha³ Górny