all messages for Emacs-related lists mirrored at yhetil.org
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
@ 2004-04-18 22:42 Miles Bader
  2004-04-18 23:52 ` Juanma Barranquero
                   ` (4 more replies)
  0 siblings, 5 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Miles Bader @ 2004-04-18 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw)


Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
at the beginning?  Their presence can cover up bugs[*], and as they all
get recompiled by make bootstrap anyway, initially removing them
shouldn't appreciably lengthen the time required for the bootstrap.

[*] See the recent emacs-devel thread `Subject: batch-bytecomp backtrace?'

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
"I distrust a research person who is always obviously busy on a task."
   --Robert Frosch, VP, GM Research

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-18 22:42 removing .elc files for `make bootstrap' Miles Bader
@ 2004-04-18 23:52 ` Juanma Barranquero
  2004-04-19  1:36 ` Kenichi Handa
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Juanma Barranquero @ 2004-04-18 23:52 UTC (permalink / raw)


On 19 Apr 2004 07:42:01 +0900, Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> wrote:

> Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
> at the beginning?

FWIW, that's what the Windows makefiles already do.

                                                           /L/e/k/t/u

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-18 22:42 removing .elc files for `make bootstrap' Miles Bader
  2004-04-18 23:52 ` Juanma Barranquero
@ 2004-04-19  1:36 ` Kenichi Handa
  2004-04-19  6:50 ` Jérôme Marant
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kenichi Handa @ 2004-04-19  1:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: emacs-devel

In article <87d664nc1y.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp>, Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:

> Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
> at the beginning?  Their presence can cover up bugs[*], and as they all
> get recompiled by make bootstrap anyway, initially removing them
> shouldn't appreciably lengthen the time required for the bootstrap.

> [*] See the recent emacs-devel thread `Subject: batch-bytecomp backtrace?'

I agree with that change.  Just recently I was bitten by
this problem when I synchronized emacs-unicode-2 to the
trunk.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
handa@m17n.org

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-18 22:42 removing .elc files for `make bootstrap' Miles Bader
  2004-04-18 23:52 ` Juanma Barranquero
  2004-04-19  1:36 ` Kenichi Handa
@ 2004-04-19  6:50 ` Jérôme Marant
  2004-04-19 14:22 ` Stefan Monnier
  2004-04-19 14:25 ` Stefan Monnier
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jérôme Marant @ 2004-04-19  6:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: emacs-devel

Quoting Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>:

> Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
> at the beginning?  Their presence can cover up bugs[*], and as they all
> get recompiled by make bootstrap anyway, initially removing them
> shouldn't appreciably lengthen the time required for the bootstrap.

Couldn't the bootstrap target simply depend on the maintainer-clean one?

-- 
Jérôme Marant

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-18 22:42 removing .elc files for `make bootstrap' Miles Bader
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2004-04-19  6:50 ` Jérôme Marant
@ 2004-04-19 14:22 ` Stefan Monnier
  2004-04-19 14:25 ` Stefan Monnier
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-04-19 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: emacs-devel

> Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
> at the beginning?  Their presence can cover up bugs[*], and as they all
> get recompiled by make bootstrap anyway, initially removing them
> shouldn't appreciably lengthen the time required for the bootstrap.

I'd rather insist on people using

    make maintainer-clean bootstrap

so we can keep working on making `make bootstrap' and `make' closer
to each other.


        Stefan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-18 22:42 removing .elc files for `make bootstrap' Miles Bader
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2004-04-19 14:22 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2004-04-19 14:25 ` Stefan Monnier
  2004-04-19 21:29   ` Miles Bader
  2004-04-19 23:54   ` Kenichi Handa
  4 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2004-04-19 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: emacs-devel

> Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
> at the beginning?

I need/want a bootstrap target that is "restartable".
So we should distinguish between `maintainer-clean' which prepares for
a clean boostrap and `bootstrap' which just builds the files assuming that
the dependencies are correct (or that the files were removed by
maintainer-clean if the dependencies were not).


        Stefan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-19 14:25 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2004-04-19 21:29   ` Miles Bader
  2004-04-19 23:49     ` Kim F. Storm
  2004-04-19 23:54   ` Kenichi Handa
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Miles Bader @ 2004-04-19 21:29 UTC (permalink / raw)


Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
> > Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
> > at the beginning?
> 
> I need/want a bootstrap target that is "restartable".

I'd love that too!

> So we should distinguish between `maintainer-clean' which prepares for
> a clean boostrap and `bootstrap' which just builds the files assuming that
> the dependencies are correct (or that the files were removed by
> maintainer-clean if the dependencies were not).

Why not keep the current semantics for `bootstrap', and add `bootstrap-cont'
or something to continue with a previous bootstrap?

I'm not sure how important it is to maintain compatibility, but it seems
like `make bootstrap' has become something of an idiom -- many people
think of it as what you do when you want to double-check an emacs tree
for buildability.

-Miles
-- 
My spirit felt washed.  With blood.  [Eli Shin, on "The Passion of the Christ"]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-19 21:29   ` Miles Bader
@ 2004-04-19 23:49     ` Kim F. Storm
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kim F. Storm @ 2004-04-19 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: emacs-devel

Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:

> Why not keep the current semantics for `bootstrap', and add `bootstrap-cont'
> or something to continue with a previous bootstrap?

make reboot

  :-)

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: removing .elc files for `make bootstrap'
  2004-04-19 14:25 ` Stefan Monnier
  2004-04-19 21:29   ` Miles Bader
@ 2004-04-19 23:54   ` Kenichi Handa
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kenichi Handa @ 2004-04-19 23:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: emacs-devel, miles

In article <jwvn05859nk.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>>  Any objection to me changing `make bootstrap' to remove all .elc files
>>  at the beginning?

> I need/want a bootstrap target that is "restartable".
> So we should distinguish between `maintainer-clean' which prepares for
> a clean boostrap and `bootstrap' which just builds the files assuming that
> the dependencies are correct (or that the files were removed by
> maintainer-clean if the dependencies were not).

I think the basic problem of having old .elc is that
`require' loads it even if there exists a newer .el.  Can't
we solve this problem by having a flag variable which, if
non-nil, forces loading whichever the newer one.  Then we
can bind that variable to t on bootstrapping (or always on
byte-compiling).

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
handa@m17n.org

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2004-04-19 23:54 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-04-18 22:42 removing .elc files for `make bootstrap' Miles Bader
2004-04-18 23:52 ` Juanma Barranquero
2004-04-19  1:36 ` Kenichi Handa
2004-04-19  6:50 ` Jérôme Marant
2004-04-19 14:22 ` Stefan Monnier
2004-04-19 14:25 ` Stefan Monnier
2004-04-19 21:29   ` Miles Bader
2004-04-19 23:49     ` Kim F. Storm
2004-04-19 23:54   ` Kenichi Handa

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.