From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:50790) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qm5JP-00016l-OU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:42:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qm5JO-0000WF-J0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:42:15 -0400 Message-ID: <4E3023BA.3030105@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 09:42:02 -0500 From: Michael Roth MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1311652562-10794-1-git-send-email-cerbere@gmail.com> <1311652562-10794-2-git-send-email-cerbere@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH 1/2] Makefile: distclean should clean all possible targets List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexandre Raymond Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , Qemu Developers On 07/27/2011 08:55 AM, Alexandre Raymond wrote: >> There are many more object files that are built conditionally. Why is >> it okay not to delete them? > > Perhaps they should be deleted too... > > The GNU Make manual says the following about "distclean": > http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/make/Standard-Targets.html > > "Delete all files in the current directory (or created by this > makefile) that are created by configuring or building the program. If > you have unpacked the source and built the program without creating > any other files, =E2=80=98make distclean=E2=80=99 should leave only the= files that > were in the distribution. However, there is no need to delete parent > directories that were created with =E2=80=98mkdir -p=E2=80=99, since th= ey could have > existed anyway. " > > Now, if everyone agrees that "distclean" is fine as it is, I won't > insist on anything. > > I'm with you in that distclean to me reads as "make clean for=20 re-distribution". i.e. a pristine source tree. But I do agree that if we want to implement it in that fashion there=20 would be a bit more work to do. >> >> If you unwisely messed up your source tree by building in it, a simple >> and reliable way out is to git-clone yourself a new one. Or if you >> insist on recovering in-place, remove files outside .git that aren't i= n >> git. >> > > Indeed. > > Alexandre >