Re: [PATCH] build: update top-level make help

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 08:14 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > 
> > > > On 02.09.15 at 15:34, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 07:14 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 02.09.15 at 15:09, <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 3:28 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> 09/01/15 10:10 PM >>>
> > > > > > --- a/Makefile
> > > > > > +++ b/Makefile
> > > > > > @@ -228,16 +228,23 @@ help:
> > > > > > @echo '  install-stubdom       - build and install the 
> > > > > > stubdomain 
> > > > > > images'
> > > > > > @echo '  install-docs          - build and install user 
> > > > > > documentation'
> > > > > > @echo ''
> > > > > > -      @echo 'Building targets:'
> > > > > > +      @echo 'Local dist targets:'
> > > > > > @echo '  dist                  - build and install everything 
> > > > > > into 
> > > > > > local dist directory'
> > > > > > @echo '  world                 - clean everything then make 
> > > > > > dist'
> > > > > > -      @echo '  xen                   - build and install Xen 
> > > > > > hypervisor'
> > > > > > -      @echo '  tools                 - build and install 
> > > > > > tools'
> > > > > > -      @echo '  stubdom               - build and install the 
> > > > > > stubdomain images'
> > > > > > -      @echo '  docs                  - build and install user 
> > > > > > documentation'
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why are these being removed? At least the xen and tools ones work 
> > > > > 
> > > > > fine for me.
> > > > 
> > > > In the makefile they're marked as "legacy" and they are wired 
> > > > straight
> > > > to their "dist-" equivalents.
> > > 
> > > But still they're there and they work (and they're faster to type 
> > > than
> > > their "dist-" equivalents).
> > 
> > If they are legacy then it is correct to not list them here.
> 
> Hmm - why does "legacy" imply "not documented here"?

Legacy means "deprecated" and/or "not encouraged", which to me implies we
should direct users to the non-deprecated alternatives, which also serves
to make the list of potential targets in the help less overwhelming.

> But anyway - I don't mean to stand in the way of you committing the
> patch as is, as long as those (legacy) build targets don't go away.
> 
> Jan
>