[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack.
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack. |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:50:43 +0000 |
Hello, Stefan.
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 15:48:23 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> >> > -.PHONY: compile-first compile-main compile compile-always
> >> >> > +.PHONY: compile-zeroth compile-first compile-main compile
> >> >> > compile-always
> >> >> > -compile-first: $(COMPILE_FIRST)
> >> >> > +compile-zeroth: $(COMPILE_ZEROTH)
> >> >> > +compile-first: compile-zeroth $(COMPILE_FIRST)
> >> >> Is this necessary, or is it just helpful to debug the Makefile?
> >> > I'm not sure. I'm a little confused, still.
> > It seems to be necessary. At any rate, changing the mix slightly gave
> > rise to unwanted results. In particular...
> >> At least I can't see why `compile-first` should need to depend on
> >> `compile-zeroth` since the
> >> %.elc: %.el $(COMPILE_ZEROTH)
> > If I change that line to
> > %.elc: %.el compile-zeroth
> > , then Emacs builds, but redundantly ELC's all the .el files which are
> > preloaded, taking 15 seconds longer to do so. I don't understand why
> > this happens.
> > Even more notably, if I eliminate compile-zeroth, putting in instead
> > $(COMPILE_ZEROTH) everywhere needed, then make creates and deletes the
> > ..elc0 files four times, and also redundantly runs ELC on the preloaded
> > ..el files, despite them already being .eln's. This run took 2½ minutes
> > longer than expected, too. I don't understand why all that happened,
> > either.
> But what if you don't define `compile-zeroth`, and you keep:
> compile-first: $(COMPILE_FIRST)
> and
> %.elc: %.el $(COMPILE_ZEROTH)
> ?
I think that is what I have just tried again. The results are as in my
paragraph above beginning "Even more notably, ....".
I don't understand at all what's happening. Maybe it's something to do
with compile-zeroth being declared .PHONY. It also might have to do with
make somehow regarding *.elc0 as "intermediate files", and is thus "safe"
to delete them (four times deleted in total).
> >> rule should already give the same result. So I'd suggest you drop
> >> this part of the patch and see if that causes any kind of trouble.
> > As above, it caused all sorts of trouble.
> Maybe I'm confused but IIUC none of what you tried corresponds to just
> not using the above hunk.
I think I'm confused. make isn't a simple program.
> Stefan
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Alan Mackenzie, 2022/01/17
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Stefan Monnier, 2022/01/17
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Alan Mackenzie, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Stefan Monnier, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Alan Mackenzie, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Stefan Monnier, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack.,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Stefan Monnier, 2022/01/19
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Stefan Monnier, 2022/01/19
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Robert Pluim, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Alan Mackenzie, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Robert Pluim, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Stefan Monnier, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Robert Pluim, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Robert Pluim, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Eli Zaretskii, 2022/01/18
- Re: Speeding up the bootstrap build - a quick hack., Andrea Corallo, 2022/01/18