Re: extraclean and admin/grammars [was Re: Git master head build failure?]

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: chad <yandros@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2021 15:36:51 -0700
> Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>, rgm@gnu.org, Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>, 
> 	Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, EMACS development team <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> 
>  # make bootstrap
>  #      Removes all the compiled files to force a new bootstrap from a
>  #      clean slate, and then build in the normal way.
> 
> ..it makes me think something much closer to what I think Lars was saying "make bootstrap" should do than
> "only use this if you don't have src/{t,}emacs", which is roughly how I interpret (perhaps wrongly) what Eli is
> suggesting "make boostrap" is for. It also surprises me that emacs' build system needs clean, mostlyclean,
> distclean, maintainer-clean, extraclean, and bootstrap, but that overhead seems very low, mostly confusion
> around which to use. 

I guess you've missed the "all the compiled files" part?

> Probably, I'm biased by my own use-case, which is roughly: I periodically (multiple times a week) pull and
> bootstrap emacs using a custom build script, so I can test the latest and greatest of emacs-devel. When I do
> work on specific changes myself, I use "make all" nearly all the time (I have memories of needing to
> bootstrap now and then, but I can't recall the circumstances). That said, I'm using a moderately performant
> machine, (currently 3 years old, before that up to 8 years old) and typically run -j6.

I think your workflow is based on old Makefiles, where "make
bootstrap" was needed much more frequently than nowadays.  When we
switched to requiring GNU Make, many changes were made in the
configury stuff that make bootstrap needed much less frequently.  From
now on, I suggest that you just say "make -j6", it should "just work".