Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:47:45 -0700
From: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@ebuilt.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org, rbb@covalent.net
Cc: Charles Randall <crandall@matchlogic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RE: make distclean doesn't
Message-ID: <20010831104745.C10838@ebuilt.com>
References: 
 <5FE9B713CCCDD311A03400508B8B30130828F3B2@bdr-xcln.corp.matchlogic.com>
 <20010831173840.7CB2146993@koj.rkbloom.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20010831173840.7CB2146993@koj.rkbloom.net>;
 from rbb@covalent.net on Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 10:38:39AM -0700
Status: O

On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 10:38:39AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Friday 31 August 2001 10:31, Charles Randall wrote:
> > From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:jerenkrantz@ebuilt.com]
> >
> > >FWIW, we should not remove the config.nice files or certain generated
> > >files (exports.c seems to come to mind) under any circumstances.  We
> > >also don't remove build.mk because it is like a Makefile (which we
> > >don't seem to remove).
> >
> > Hmm. Am I the only one who assumes that "make distclean" is supposed to
> > return the directory structure to the state of distribution?
> >
> > Does anyone else have thoughts on this?
> 
> Make distclean should definately clean to a distribution state.  If it doesn't,
> then it is broken.  Make clean should be used to clean everything except
> the types of files mentioned above.

I think the point is that there are some files that can be generated
that shouldn't be cleaned.  We don't want to remove config.nice for
sure and we probably don't want to remove exports.c as it never
changes.  As gstein has pointed out, exports.c should be created by 
the roll script because it is only dependent on the .c files in the
tree.

All of that said, I am sure that there are some files that we do
need to clean up that we aren't doing now.  -- justin