Re: compilation question

[John Mandereau]

Le dimanche 09 août 2009 à 08:27 +0200, Werner LEMBERG a écrit : 
> Is it OK nowadays to say
> 
>   git pull
>   make all
> 
> to *really* have a good build?

Not really.  There is an issue in the tracker about fonts that are not
rebuilt after changes in the fonts sources and the build tree is not
clean, and after some builds with -j3 flag I have to call 'make all'
again because output fonts are not set up properly for using compiled
binary without installation (e.g. for docs compilation).  mf/GNUmakefile
is a bit of a mess, but I can't clean it up before learning how fonts
are built :-P


>   For example, I see that there are no
> makefile rules which handle changes to configure.in or aclocal.m4...[1]

Should we ever have one?  I'm not sure this is a good idea, because
AFAIK make can't rerun configure with all the options the user could
wish, so configure (and thus autogen.sh) should be rerun manually.


> Second, is it now safe to follow with
> 
>   make doc
> 
> to get an up-to-date documentation?

Not in case there are already compiled docs in out-www/ directories.


>   I know that Graham is currently
> restructuring the documentation directories, so I don't count
> inconsistencies related to that issue -- I know I have to wait until
> he is done.

See how I proposed to fix this in 
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-07/msg00795.html
I'm on the way...


> Usually, I'm always doing a build starting from zero, but sometimes
> I'm lazy...

Try touching .tely/.texi master files before rebuilding.

Cheers,
John

signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée