Makefile.in

Makefile.in

[Luc Teirlinck]

Part of the documentation in Makefile.in, quoted below, looks strange.
>From it, I would get the impression that .elc files would be deleted
by `make clean' and certainly by `make distclean'.  This does not
happen.  Is the fact that it does not happen a bug or is it to be
expected?  If it is not a bug then why does the text below seem to
suggest that the difference between `make distclean' and `make
maintainer-clean' consists of the removal of some obscure stuff,
whereas the main difference is that `make maintainer-clean' removes
.elc files.  Note that I am by no means an expert on make files, but
the information quoted below does seem to be relevant even to non make
file experts.

# make clean  or  make mostlyclean
#      Delete all files from the current directory that are normally
#      created by building the program.	  Don't delete the files that
#      record the configuration.  Also preserve files that could be made
#      by building, but normally aren't because the distribution comes
#      with them.
#
#      Delete `.dvi' files here if they are not part of the distribution.
#
# make distclean
#      Delete all files from the current directory that are created by
#      configuring or building the program.  If you have unpacked the
#      source and built the program without creating any other files,
#      `make distclean' should leave only the files that were in the
#      distribution.
#
# make maintainer-clean
#      Delete everything from the current directory that can be
#      reconstructed with this Makefile.  This typically includes
#      everything deleted by distclean, plus more: C source files
#      produced by Bison, tags tables, info files, and so on.
#
# make extraclean
#      Still more severe - delete backup and autosave files, too.

Sincerely,

Luc.

Re: Makefile.in

[Miles Bader]

On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:38:29AM -0600, Luc Teirlinck wrote:
> Part of the documentation in Makefile.in, quoted below, looks strange.
> From it, I would get the impression that .elc files would be deleted by
> `make clean' and certainly by `make distclean'.  This does not happen.  Is
> the fact that it does not happen a bug or is it to be expected?

It's been a long time since I downloaded an emacs distribution tarball, but I
think they always came with .elc files.  Given this, neither `make clean' nor
`make distclean' should delete them.  A CVS checkout is _not_ a distribution.

[And I think `make clean' should never delete them, because they are too
expensive to recreate from scratch -- much more expensive than just
recompiling all the C code]

-Miles
-- 
Would you like fries with that?

Re: Makefile.in

[Luc Teirlinck]

Miles Bader wrote:

   It's been a long time since I downloaded an emacs distribution
   tarball, but I think they always came with .elc files.  Given this,
   neither `make clean' nor `make distclean' should delete them.  A
   CVS checkout is _not_ a distribution.

   [And I think `make clean' should never delete them, because they
   are too expensive to recreate from scratch -- much more expensive
   than just recompiling all the C code]

OK, so what about making this clear:

===File ~/Makefile.in-diff==================================
*** Makefile.in.~1.286.~	Tue Mar  2 19:50:19 2004
--- Makefile.in	Sat Mar 13 11:14:29 2004
***************
*** 45,52 ****
  # make maintainer-clean
  #      Delete everything from the current directory that can be
  #      reconstructed with this Makefile.  This typically includes
! #      everything deleted by distclean, plus more: C source files
! #      produced by Bison, tags tables, info files, and so on.
  #
  # make extraclean
  #      Still more severe - delete backup and autosave files, too.
--- 45,53 ----
  # make maintainer-clean
  #      Delete everything from the current directory that can be
  #      reconstructed with this Makefile.  This typically includes
! #      everything deleted by distclean, plus more: .elc files,
! #      C source files produced by Bison, tags tables, info files,
! #      and so on.
  #
  # make extraclean
  #      Still more severe - delete backup and autosave files, too.
============================================================

Re: Makefile.in

[Miles Bader]

On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 11:27:19AM -0600, Luc Teirlinck wrote:
> OK, so what about making this clear:

Well, whatever, I have no particular objection.  I don't think it's necessary
though -- it's pretty clear from the language in those comments that the list
of things affected is just an example of typical usage, and not an exhaustive
list.

-Miles
-- 
`Life is a boundless sea of bitterness'

Re: Makefile.in

[Luc Teirlinck]

Mile Bader wrote:

   Well, whatever, I have no particular objection.  I don't think it's
   necessary though -- it's pretty clear from the language in those
   comments that the list of things affected is just an example of
   typical usage, and not an exhaustive list.

Yes, but that is not a good reason not to mention the most _relevant_
things.  Especially since it is not completely clear from the present
documentation which of the make ... clean's will delete the .elc
files.

Unless somebody objects, I will add the .elc to the list.  I will wait
till some time Tuesday to do so.

Sincerely,

Luc.

Re: Makefile.in

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 12:05:01 -0500
> From: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
> 
> It's been a long time since I downloaded an emacs distribution tarball, but I
> think they always came with .elc files.

True.

> Given this, neither `make clean' nor `make distclean' should delete
> them.

How about maintainer-clean?

Re: Makefile.in

[Richard Stallman]

    It's been a long time since I downloaded an emacs distribution tarball, but I
    think they always came with .elc files.  Given this, neither `make clean' nor
    `make distclean' should delete them.

That is correct.