From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20253 invoked by alias); 31 Dec 2006 14:54:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 20239 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Dec 2006 14:54:38 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:54:34 +0000 Received: (qmail 7802 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2006 14:54:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (jimb@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 31 Dec 2006 14:54:33 -0000 To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/testsuite/ada] re-implement make clean & distclean References: <20061231100755.GQ3640@adacore.com> <200612311312.kBVDCA3B000981@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20061231143237.GA3428@adacore.com> From: Jim Blandy Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:54:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20061231143237.GA3428@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Sun, 31 Dec 2006 18:32:37 +0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-12/txt/msg00403.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker writes: >> > 2006-12-31 Joel Brobecker >> > >> > * gdb.ada/Makefile.in (EXECUTABLES): Delete. >> > (MISCELLANEOUS): Delete. >> > (clean): Re-implement. >> > (mostlyclean): Likewise. >> > >> > Tested on my x86-linux laptop. Any objection? >> >> Hmm, seems a bit scary to me. If I read this correctly, a file named >> NOTES would be wiped isn't it? I'm using a seperate object dir, so I >> probably won't care, but others might... > > The thing is that we very rarely add files other than the exp files > and the source code. If we add a file called NOTES in gdb.ada, then > we can adjust the exclusion list in the find command. Doing it the > other way around is a lot more work. Mistakes in Joel's suggested new procedure would be caught by CVS --- another point in its favor.