[LLVMdev] make dist?

Reid Spencer reid at x10sys.com
Fri Apr 14 10:32:42 PDT 2006

Good point. Anyone have a contrary opinion?


On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 18:23 +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Reid,
> > On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 21:03 -0500, Tanya Lattner wrote:
> > > It it necessary for dist-check to run make dist? 
> > 
> > Y'know, when I typed that, I knew you were going to ask that. It
> > doesn't make sense to me either. Seems a bit overkillish to me.  
> I think a `make distcheck' should do a `make dist' because it checks
> that a tarball can reproduce itself.  It doesn't ensure that a file
> checked-out of CVS makes it into the tarball, but if `make dist' depends
> on ./foo being present and it's there from CVS the first time, but
> doesn't make it into the tarball then it won't be there for distcheck's
> build of the dist target.
> I too have rolled by own automake-style targets in the past, and having
> distcheck do a dist has caught problems.  That's probably why you
> included it  ;-)
> > > If this is not really necessarily, that would cut down the amount of
> > > disk space used..  correct?
> > 
> > Yes, it would .. by one third.  I'll take it out.
> Would the saving be that great?  The `make dist' is just copying source
> files and tarring them up whereas the bulk of LLVM seems to be in the
> object files produced when building.
> Cheers,
> Ralph.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20060414/80384db4/attachment.sig>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list