Re: have TEXINFO_XS=required adapted to TEXINFO_XS_*=0 and disabled XS

On Fri, Jan 30, 2026 at 10:24:25PM +0000, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 09:58:08AM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > > My current idea with the requiredifenabled possibility is to use it such
> > > that there is no need to report anything, if the state is no exactly the
> > > expected state, there would be a failure.
> > 
> > I failed to do that.  For modules that are not replaced as a whole and
> > have overriden functions, right now it is not easy to avoid functions to
> > be overriden in advance.  This could be changed, but there is also the
> > possibility to replace whole modules that could be more relevant, as it
> > would simplify XS loading and also make clearer which functions are
> > overriden.
> 
> I understand your idea for using the configure-time setting in the test
> suite.  This way the tests should be guaranteed to run according to what
> configure found, which the user can check in config.log files or by seeing
> the output of configure.  It means the tests check that the XS modules load
> and run as expected.  (Printing the status of the XS code - or whether
> ctexi2any is being used - when the test suite runs doesn't seem to be
> easy to do.)

I did what I could to be clearer and explain what still fails and why,
with two FIXME.

I think that we cannot do more for now, but if we manage to have
fallback modules more generally, it could then work.

I propose to remove the reference to TEXINFO_XS=requiredifenabled in
INSTALL since it does not work as expected for now.  Ok?

-- 
Pat