From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert P. J. Day Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 04:40:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Buildroot] make clean not so clean In-Reply-To: <20080201082056.GA32415@aon.at> References: <214360.55769.qm@web56410.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <1201844203.3526.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080201082056.GA32415@aon.at> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Bernhard Fischer wrote: > On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 12:36:43AM -0500, Ormund Williams wrote: > >On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 21:02 -0800, jake sullivan wrote: > >> I'm not sure how to go about fixing this, but I have been able to > >> recreate an annoying little bug (that I think is the source of a > >> number of other newb problems). > >> > >...(snip)... > >> My gut says to update "make clean" to delete all the config files (and > >> basically everything but the source files), but before I put work into > >> making and testing a patch, I want to make sure that is the right > >> approach... > >> > >Don't know about "Right Appraach", but I just locate my download > >directory outside the Buildroot tree. > > > >Under: Build Options ---> > > > > $(BASE_DIR)/../dl) Download dir > > This historical behaviour is indeed annoying. Note that distclean only > deletes the DL_DIR if it is set to the default ("$(BASE_DIR)/dl"). I > usually set it to $(BASE_DIR)/down due to this slightly inconvenient > behaviour. > > Changing this behaviour is easy, but how should DL_DIR be > cleaned-out? make dl-clean? Suggestions for a better name for the > target? this drove me a bit nuts when i first started working with OpenWrt but, as much as it pains me to say it, i think the current behaviour is the correct one -- "make distclean" is historically understood to mean, "clean right down to the original distribution", and that absolutely involves getting rid of downloaded sources *if they've been placed in that directory*. the only reasonable solution is to somehow emphatically recommend to users to keep their downloaded sources elsewhere (which is a good idea, anyway). i don't see the need for an extra target that covers the downloads directory. p.s. one potentially hideous solution is to not specify a default location for the downloads directory and *force* the user to pick an initial location, at which point you can warn him/her. but that strikes me as overly annoying, so maybe forget that plan. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Home page: http://crashcourse.ca Fedora Cookbook: http://crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Fedora_Cookbook ========================================================================