From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A more radical cleanup for make bootstrap? Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 20:26:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9502"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Po Lu , Stefan Monnier , Stefan Kangas , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 19 22:28:32 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oaNNX-0002G6-WA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2022 22:28:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53642 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oaNNR-0004UA-GP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2022 16:28:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45546) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oaNLj-0003Qn-3L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2022 16:26:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mx3.muc.de ([193.149.48.5]:16437) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oaNLg-00085a-F7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2022 16:26:38 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 38678 invoked by uid 3782); 19 Sep 2022 22:26:33 +0200 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4fe15eed.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.225.94.237]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Sep 2022 22:26:32 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 28847 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Sep 2022 20:26:32 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.5; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mx3.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:295753 Archived-At: Hello, Gregory. On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 19:46:55 +0000, Gregory Heytings wrote: > [Subject changed so that potentially interested readers do not miss it.] Thanks! > >> WDYT of simply adding another "full-bootstrap" target, with the meaning > >> "from the lowest possible ground"? > > If other people are so married to the "bootstrap" name that they refuse > > to consider renaming it, I don't think it's worth spending more time > > arguing about. So, sure. > Now Stefan M and Po Lu both said (IIUC) that what they'd like is a > bootstrap that does a less radical cleanup than what bootstrap now does. > And (again IIUC) Eli and you (and others) agree that bootstrap should > start with a state that is as clean as possible (which is what extraclean > does). The prime quality of the current bootstrap is that it doesn't delete anything unrecoverable - it only deletes generated files. > So what I'd suggest is to use extraclean in bootstrap, and add either > another target like "soft-bootstrap" or a configuration variable like > "SOFT=true" that would make a less radical cleanup than what > bootstrap-cleanup now does. It's not clear from the comments what extraclean does. The comments just say it does "delete backup and autosave files, too", without specifying the files whose backup and autosave files get deleted. > Would that be a solution that is acceptable to everyone? If I understand correctly, the proposed bootstrap would irrevocably delete unrecoverable files. I don't think this should be done as a side effect of something else, rather users who want extraclean should have to say so explicitly, as a safety measure. Again, if I understand correctly, I would type make bootstrap out of sheer finger memory and lose lots of files. I'd be unhappy about that. Why not, instead, leave bootstrap as it is (possibly removing the call to ./configure from it) and give the new target a new name, such as bootstrap-hard? -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).