[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: etags name collision.
From: |
Andreas Schwab |
Subject: |
Re: etags name collision. |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Apr 2022 10:30:17 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) |
On Apr 12 2022, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> Not all systems use Exuberant Ctags or Universal Ctags. On the BSDs,
> ctags is compatible with the Emacs ctags output (which is why it
> exists, AFAIR). Exuberant Ctags etc do not work with either vi(1) or
> mg(1) on those systems, and their output is at odds with what is
> standardized by POSIX.
Exuberant ctags was originally distributed with vim, so it is tailored
for that.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
- etags name collision., Ergus, 2022/04/11
- Re: etags name collision., Eli Zaretskii, 2022/04/11
- Re: etags name collision., Dmitry Gutov, 2022/04/11
- Re: etags name collision., Ergus, 2022/04/11
- Re: etags name collision., Eli Zaretskii, 2022/04/11
- Re: etags name collision., Ergus, 2022/04/11
- Re: etags name collision., Alfred M. Szmidt, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision.,
Andreas Schwab <=
- Re: etags name collision., Ergus, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Po Lu, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Ergus, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Dmitry Gutov, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Po Lu, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Alfred M. Szmidt, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Dmitry Gutov, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Óscar Fuentes, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Ergus, 2022/04/12
- Re: etags name collision., Alfred M. Szmidt, 2022/04/12