Re: dist-all

[Akim Demaille]

Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:

> Akim --
> 
> I think one of your patches probably broke `make dist-all'.
> 
> Right now it ends up depending on each dist target that is used.
> However each such target ends by removing the dist directory.
> The point of having dist-all is that it is more efficient to simply
> create the dist directory once, do all the packaging, and then delete
> it.  I think that's how it used to work, but it doesn't appear to work
> that way now...

My memory is precisely that it was not working this way, and I was
quite surprised of it.

In fact, technically, I'm pretty sure it always worked like this: the
dist, dist-shar etc. are inline, i.e., they don't call any inner
do-the-job-target and call rm distdir afterwards.

Because it meant introducing new intermediary
do-the-job-but-don't-rm-dirstdir targets, I did not try to improve the
situation (it was not the issue I was addressing).

We can do it, sure.  But I wanted to make it clear it always worked
this way :)