From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lute Kamstra Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] make-dist fixes and clean-ups Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 10:15:39 +0200 Message-ID: <874qdb4huc.fsf@xs4all.nl> References: <87vf64bk4u.fsf@marant.org> <87d5sbcfqi.fsf@xs4all.nl> <87y8az2l7i.fsf@marant.org> <87wtq84mnx.fsf@xs4all.nl> <87k6m8qa79.fsf@marant.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1115712915 15346 80.91.229.2 (10 May 2005 08:15:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 08:15:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 10 10:15:11 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DVPsy-00067p-Dt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 10:14:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DVQ0b-0004I1-5v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 04:22:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DVPyN-0004Fz-Fh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 04:20:12 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DVPyA-0004E4-SW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 04:20:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DVPy8-0004C8-PE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 04:19:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [194.109.24.34] (helo=smtp-vbr14.xs4all.nl) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DVQ0T-0006UU-Ej for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 04:22:21 -0400 Original-Received: from pijl (a80-127-67-124.adsl.xs4all.nl [80.127.67.124]) by smtp-vbr14.xs4all.nl (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4A8FecW046756; Tue, 10 May 2005 10:15:40 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Lute.Kamstra@xs4all.nl) Original-Received: from lute by pijl with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DVPtz-00016U-00; Tue, 10 May 2005 10:15:39 +0200 Original-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me?= Marant In-Reply-To: <87k6m8qa79.fsf@marant.org> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me?= Marant's message of "Tue, 10 May 2005 00:57:30 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) Original-Lines: 45 X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:36934 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:36934 J=E9r=F4me Marant writes: > Lute Kamstra writes: > >> So you do the following? >> >> 1. Checkout a clean working copy of Emacs' CSV. >> 2. Run "make-dist --snapshot" to get a tarball (without .elc or info >> files).=20 >> 3. Unpack this tarball. >> 4. Run ".configure" and "make bootstrap" on that tree. > > Exactly. > >> What about the patch below then? It makes sure that make-dist never >> distributes ldefs-boot.el (that way, ldefs-boot.el will never be >> installed either) and it ensures that a tarball created by the above >> method can bootstrap. > > Many people already proposed that Huh? I didn't see it in any of the messages posted to emacs-devel. They all talked about changing Emacs' Makefiles or the Debian script, not about changing make-dist. > but this is wrong since 'make maintainer-clean', which undoes the > bootstrap, will remove loaddefs.el (which is fine since > autogenerated files have to be removed). > > Hence, I can't bootstrap more than once with the same tarball. Out of curiosity: do you have any special reason to do a "make maintainer-clean" before a second "make bootstrap"? Why do a second bootstrap at all? > How about leaving ldefs-boot.el and see if it hurts? Apart from being redundant under normal circumstances, it probably doesn't hurt in any way. Come to think of it: it's actually a nice feature that the distribution tarball allows a "make maintainer-clean" and then a ".configure" plus "make bootstrap". You convinced me to distribute ldefs-boot.el. ;-) Lute.