On 17 July 2018 at 18:05, Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 01:33:38PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote: >>> If you don't want to compile everything, you configure >>> config-devices.mak. And then make clean remove it, and make will >>> create a default one without your configuration. Fix it by not >>> removing it. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> Makefile | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile >>> index 2da686be33..2ffbcde323 100644 >>> --- a/Makefile >>> +++ b/Makefile >>> @@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ clean: >>> if test -d $$d; then $(MAKE) -C $$d $@ || exit 1; fi; \ >>> rm -f $$d/qemu-options.def; \ >>> done >>> - rm -f $(SUBDIR_DEVICES_MAK) config-all-devices.mak >>> + rm -f config-all-devices.mak >>> >>> VERSION ?= $(shell cat VERSION) >> >> This feels wrong to me. If 'make' is creating config-devices.mak, then >> either 'make clean' or 'make distclean' must remove it. So if you remove >> it here, it should be added to distclean instead. > > I can agree with putting it on distclean. > > make don't put it there if it is already there. My use case is that I > have several build trees from the same source three: > > - x86_64-softmmu with minimal set of devices (the ones that I use) > - x86_64-softmmu with everything under the sun > - everything that can be compiled in in fedora > > for the 1st case, I am interested that it is fast, so I edit the > x86_64-softmmu/config-device.mak. But if I do a make clean for any > reason, I lost my changes.
I think the problem here is that we're confused about whether config-devices.mak should be a user-editable file or just part of our build process. Personally I think we should go for the latter, ie if there are useful use cases that currently you need to edit the file to achieve, we should provide a better mechanism for doing them. thanks -- PMM
