Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2013
Re: [perl #38307] make clean with 5.8.8-RC1
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Fergal Daly
Date:
July 29, 2013 23:17
Subject:
Re: [perl #38307] make clean with 5.8.8-RC1
Message ID:
CALqwHtZxvGTUiPR11nO43P9Gk_zeYnu7Lu=fCZf5sWJLamxnrQ@mail.gmail.com
s/may/many/
On 30 July 2013 08:13, James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@perl.org>wrote:
> On Mon Jul 29 03:02:42 2013, nicholas wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 06:22:24PM -0700, James E Keenan via RT wrote:
> > > On Sat May 26 17:43:55 2012, jkeenan wrote:
> > > > On Mon Jan 23 08:33:41 2006, doughera wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 05:56:36AM -0800, Fergal Daly wrote:
> > > > > > > # New Ticket Created by Fergal Daly
> > > > > > > # Please include the string: [perl #38307]
> > > > > > > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about
> > this
> > > issue.
> > > > > > > # <URL: https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38307
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I decided to change some config params (run Configure -D
> > prefix=...
> > > > > > > -d) and recompile. I cancelled the recompile very soon into
> > it and
> > > > > > > typed
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > make clean
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > but that sent it into more compilation. So it looks like the
> > clean
> > > > > > > target depends on something that causes compilation.
> > Transcript of
> > > > > > > make clean output below,
> > > > >
> > > > > That could well be. The 'clean' target has never been
> > documented for
> > > > just
> > > > > such reasons. I'm not sure if it really does anything useful.
> > The only
> > > > > two targets documented as being useful in the INSTALL file are
> > > > 'realclean'
> > > > > and 'distclean'.
> > > > >
>
> > >
> > > Any further thoughts on this? If Perl's 'make clean' is not going
> > to do
> > > anything particularly useful, shouldn't we explicitly document that
> > fact?
> >
> >
> > I don't think that a solution exists, to be able to unconditionally
> > do proper cleanup whilst also never actually doing any building under
> > any circumstances.
> >
> > So if the definition of "useful" is that "under no circumstances does
> > it
> > build anything", then it's impossible to attain.
> >
> > (Either for clean or for distclean)
> >
> > The problem is that we don't even know the complete set of build
> > products
> > until we have run Perl code using miniperl. So we can't know what to
> > delete
> > until we have a miniperl. And there are dependency rules to determine
> > that
> > miniperl is up to date before it is run, and those dependencies apply
> > just
> > as much to the clean targets.
> >
> > The clean targets do ultimately delete things. The problem is that if
> > the
> > build has got far enough to *build* things using intermediate build
> > products (ie miniperl), then the clean targets need to use those
> > intermediate build products to do the deletions, so (as coded) they
> > have to
> > ensure those build products are built before they can run them to
> > clean up.
> >
> > The ultimate result is correct (or at least, I'm not aware of
> > systematic
> > bugs where it is not), but it takes a convoluted route to get there,
> > and I
> > can't see how to avoid that route.
> >
> > Nicholas Clark
> >
>
> Fergal, Nicholas: Please review the patch to INSTALL attached.
>
> Thank you very much.
> Jim Keenan
>
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next