Reid, First, thanks for the excellent overview. This seems like it will be very useful. I have a question about dist-check. You mention that it will triple the amount of disk space I am using. I am guessing its because it does the following:> 11. runs make dist > 12. runs make clean > 13. runs make dist-cleanIt it necessary for dist-check to run make dist? Why would we want to make sure that our distribution can create a distribution? If this is not really necessarily, that would cut down the amount of disk space used.. correct? -Tanya
On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 21:03 -0500, Tanya Lattner wrote:> Reid, > > First, thanks for the excellent overview. This seems like it will be very > useful. > > I have a question about dist-check. > > You mention that it will triple the amount of disk space I am using. I am > guessing its because it does the following: > > 11. runs make dist > > 12. runs make clean > > 13. runs make dist-clean > > It it necessary for dist-check to run make dist?Y'know, when I typed that, I knew you were going to ask that. It doesn't make sense to me either. Seems a bit overkillish to me.> Why would we want to make > sure that our distribution can create a distribution?I think when I put it in Makefile.rules originally I was wanting to ensure that all the targets would be buildable, just to make sure.> If this is not > really necessarily, that would cut down the amount of disk space used.. > correct?Yes, it would .. by one third. I'll take it out. Reid. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20060411/fe0f16aa/attachment.sig>
Hi Reid,> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 21:03 -0500, Tanya Lattner wrote: > > It it necessary for dist-check to run make dist? > > Y'know, when I typed that, I knew you were going to ask that. It > doesn't make sense to me either. Seems a bit overkillish to me.I think a `make distcheck' should do a `make dist' because it checks that a tarball can reproduce itself. It doesn't ensure that a file checked-out of CVS makes it into the tarball, but if `make dist' depends on ./foo being present and it's there from CVS the first time, but doesn't make it into the tarball then it won't be there for distcheck's build of the dist target. I too have rolled by own automake-style targets in the past, and having distcheck do a dist has caught problems. That's probably why you included it ;-)> > If this is not really necessarily, that would cut down the amount of > > disk space used.. correct? > > Yes, it would .. by one third. I'll take it out.Would the saving be that great? The `make dist' is just copying source files and tarring them up whereas the bulk of LLVM seems to be in the object files produced when building. Cheers, Ralph.