Syslinux - Jul 2013 - I cannot build syslinux-5.11-pre8 from git (No rule to make target `../core/ldlinux.bss')

On 07/11/2013 01:38 PM, Igor Sverkos wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> OK, I solved the problem. Before calling "make installer", I
first
> have to call "make spotless" and "make". Then I can
call "make
> installer".
> 
> Is that documented, somewhere?
> 
That would be a bug.  The documented sequence is "make clean",
"make
installer".

	-hpa

> On 07/11/2013 01:38 PM, Igor Sverkos wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > OK, I solved the problem. Before calling "make installer", I
first
> > have to call "make spotless" and "make". Then I
can call "make
> > installer".
> > 
> > Is that documented, somewhere?
> > 
> 
> That would be a bug.  The documented sequence is "make clean",
"make
> installer".
> 
> 	-hpa
> 
 
Well, to be fair, 'make spotless' is mentioned in ./doc/distrib.txt 
for some situations, and all this would be accurate up to 5.xx (which 
is indeed mentioned in the subject of the email thread). For 6.xx, 
there is _also_ .doc/building.txt, which perhaps might be not clear 
enough for some users?

For example the following quote:
[quote]
TO build the BIOS and 64-bit EFI installers type,

	make bios efi64 installer
[/quote]
( BTW, s/TO/To/ )
might sound strange, giving that there are no "EFI" *installers*.

That's just one example for potential confusions. If that paragraph 
could generate such confusion (which might or might not), then there 
are other phrases in building.txt that could generate similar 
potential misunderstandings or inadequate syntax ("inadequate" in 
regards to the result expected by some users).

To answer to another question (posted in another email thread) that 
might show some similar potential confusion:
[quote]
 ... 'make efi64 install' ...
...
Would this also create memdisk for efi64 boot?
[/quote]

There is no "memdisk for efi64 boot". The binary file
"memdisk" is
created under "bios", and it is the only "memdisk" file
created.

So, perhaps some testers / users need to read some (additional) 
documentation? And perhaps some documentation might need some 
improvements / different wording? I don't really know; I'm just 
bringing out such possibility.

Best Regards,
Ady.

On Thu, 11 Jul, at 03:33:11PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 07/11/2013 01:38 PM, Igor Sverkos wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > OK, I solved the problem. Before calling "make installer", I
first
> > have to call "make spotless" and "make". Then I
can call "make
> > installer".
> > 
> > Is that documented, somewhere?
> > 
> 
> That would be a bug.  The documented sequence is "make clean",
"make
> installer".
For building from git? I thought the above sequence only applied to
release tarballs?

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center

On 07/12/2013 06:52 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jul, at 03:33:11PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 07/11/2013 01:38 PM, Igor Sverkos wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> OK, I solved the problem. Before calling "make
installer", I first
>>> have to call "make spotless" and "make". Then I
can call "make
>>> installer".
>>>
>>> Is that documented, somewhere?
>>>
>>
>> That would be a bug.  The documented sequence is "make
clean", "make
>> installer".
> 
> For building from git? I thought the above sequence only applied to
> release tarballs?
> 
Ah, yes.  From a clean checkout "make" should just work, from a dirty
checkout "make spotless" might indeed be necessary.

	-hpa