> "Richard" == Richard Biener writes:
Richard> If it reduces peak disk usage yes. These don't, no? That said, we
Richard> could also 'fix' the dependencies at that point?
That seems to defeat the purpose of having the dependencies.
Really it's been a bug that these dependencies were omitted
> "Jeff" == Jeff Law writes:
Jeff> But isn't the whole point of bootstrap-lean to remove those
Jeff> directories during the build?
Yeah, but I think they are still mostly removed.
We just keep the "last previous" stage around for the benefit of
"install".
It's possible I'm missing something
Jeff Law wrote:
>On 11/15/13 11:26, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> PR bootstrap/58572 was inadvertently caused by the automatic
>dependency
>> patch series.
>>
>> The symptoms are that "make bootstrap-lean" will cause a subsequent
>> "make install" to fail.
>>
>> The bug is that the automatic dependency cod
On 11/15/13 11:26, Tom Tromey wrote:
PR bootstrap/58572 was inadvertently caused by the automatic dependency
patch series.
The symptoms are that "make bootstrap-lean" will cause a subsequent
"make install" to fail.
The bug is that the automatic dependency code is picking up in-tree
dependencies
