Re: Two strange messages while building Emacs on MS-Windows

[joakim]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 21:17:04 +0100
>> From: Dani Moncayo <address@hidden>
>> Cc: Emacs development discussions <address@hidden>
>> 
>> I was following Eli's advice for doing incremental builds
>> (http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=12128#20), since
>> bootstrapping takes a lot more time.
>
> That advice wasn't meant to be used for producing distributions, only
> for your own use.
>
>> But, why the makefiles don't take care all necessary recompilations?
>
> Because we don't have a good way of tracking dependencies between Lisp
> files.
>
>> Being forced to do a full bootstrap is too bad.
>
> Why is it too bad for a distribution you do once in a while?  Let it
> run in a separate directory, and you can meanwhile do something else.
>
> How much time does it take you to bootstrap, btw?  And on what
> machine?
>
>> Is not there a better solution for this?
>
> No.  Which is why admin/make-tarball.txt, the file documenting the
> procedure to produce a release tarball, says:
>
>   2.  Bootstrap to make 100% sure all elc files are up-to-date, and to
>       make sure that the later tagged version will bootstrap, should it be
>       necessary to check it out.

Is it possible to compile for windows on gnu/linux using wine or
something? It would be interesting to setup a windows build job on my
new build server. 

-- 
Joakim Verona