----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Percival" <gra...@percival-music.ca>
To: "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net>
Cc: <julien.ri...@gmail.com>; <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>;
<re...@codereview-hr.appspotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Build: Try to convince `make' to keep intermediate files.
(issue5490077)
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 09:22:11AM -0000, Phil Holmes wrote:
A general comment on changes to the build system. How do we know
that there's been no unintended other effects of changes like this?
I think it would be wise to work up a system of checking, by doing
something like creating a list of all the files created by a build,
applying the changes, and then checking for diffs.
As long as patchy can do a full doc rebuild from scratch (done
before accepting staging), and GUB can release stuff, I'm happy
with that risk. I mean, it's not impossible that something might
still go wrong, but I figure that most potential mistakes would be
caught in that process.
If you really want to be safe, you could certainly do something
like
ls -R $HOME/lilypond-git/build > old-build-files.txt
... edit, patch, delete build dir, do full doc build...
ls -R $HOME/lilypond-git/build > new-build-files.txt
diff old-build-files.txt new-build-files.txt
If they differ, you might have a problem. But when you're adding
new log files, you'd expect those to be added, so manual attention
at the diff stage is required.
I think such a script should just be used by you locally; I don't
see enough demand/danger to warrant trying to add such a script to
Patchy.
Cheers,
- Graham
Agreed. I think it's worth those of us messing with the build system
getting used to running, though.
--
Phil Holmes
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
