From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremiah@pdp10.guru Subject: Cleaning up make clean's behavior Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2018 16:23:28 +0000 Message-ID: <87a7sd17jz.fsf@ITSx01.pdp10.guru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58771) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fP9JX-0004ow-Fo for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Jun 2018 12:23:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fP9JS-0007Bm-IJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Jun 2018 12:23:35 -0400 Received: from itsx01.pdp10.guru ([74.207.247.251]:60830 helo=itsx01) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fP9JS-00078R-C8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Jun 2018 12:23:30 -0400 Received: from auennplxrtxfoohp by itsx01 with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fP9JQ-0003gG-9k for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Jun 2018 16:23:28 +0000 List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org As running make clean breaks the bootstrap script. I propose we leverage git's shallow clones (git clone --depth 1 $URL) and include the .git directory with the repo such that we could simply have make clean check for git and if it exists run git clean -xdf and then only if git fails to exist, fallback to the existing broken form; which needs to be corrected. per discussion with g_bor[m] about the default automake clean rules being used currently; and per their suggestion bringing this question to this distribution list for further discussion. Additional wouldn't one want to pack the .git in the tarball to enable a simplified update method. jlicht pointed out that this would not be a problem yet for guix, but it does seem unconventional. It would not make sense for some bigger-repo projects (e.g. emacs) for sure though Given that discussion background does anyone have any problems, concerns or issues with the change proposed?