[Swan-dev] what should "make ; sudo make install" do (again)

Paul Wouters paul at nohats.ca
Fri May 15 20:35:53 EEST 2015

On Fri, 15 May 2015, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> My suggestion here is to remove "programs" from any and all documentation; but accept it as an
> undocumented alias for building all of userland including manuals.

That's fine with me.

> I personally think "all" should build modules as well; but that seems to get messy.  The argument for
> not having "make" default to building everything including modules is that the user needs to select
> which modules to build; hence "make" prints a help message and lets the user decide.

I don't think so. For one, "module" is a target only on Linux, not on
any other OS we build on. Second, most people at this point should not
build KLIPS and use the stock NETKEY/XFRM code. So 95% of people have
no need for "make module". For the fedora, rhel and debian packages,
no KLIPS is shipped so we can/should not compile it there.

> The other complication is that we need some short cuts (aka targets) to:
> - build/install all but documentation - linux cross compiles apparently can't deal with documentation

You had sort of convinced me those days are over. I also noticed xmlto
no longer drags in latex for me, so perhaps this requirement is now
fine. The only issue is that I would like the test VMs to be able to
not unconditionally rebuild these, beause xmlto is quite slow and it
really slows down the compile/install/test cycle.

> - build/install just binaries and scripts - to speed up test builds (this one would be less of an
> issue if the test-build process didn't rm -rf OBJDIR)

If we are getting confident that dependancies in lib/ are now properly
detected, and make will rebuild it all fine, the rm -rf could go :)


More information about the Swan-dev mailing list