From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 119866 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2019 21:37:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 119856 invoked by uid 89); 5 Apr 2019 21:37:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=amazing, H*i:sk:c60d447, H*f:sk:c60d447, HX-Languages-Length:861 X-HELO: mail-qt1-f182.google.com Received: from mail-qt1-f182.google.com (HELO mail-qt1-f182.google.com) (209.85.160.182) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 21:37:39 +0000 Received: by mail-qt1-f182.google.com with SMTP id w30so9126945qta.8 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 14:37:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gikJvJGCU6x3lENBWDDjbYRWaUxBFg9auWeWpRCmjnE=; b=lotISar/8P9BZqRh+oIf0yNEhLaO91sGBy3dpPLMZEAIafyGb+8Nh2nF0XvPa7vavQ NZHH4Y8/AqwNYHKv1fJx+ldFRuB6gAs/ULuOOFZXoX9Ain0g48qf2SCjsONosbfwL8Ul kG9t9uR+rNX+6qis13JEU5ldzf7fswMDMrzjb6v1eWuXqqzTducyI0+UKyjbu9l2DwHm 07jieR6m1TsWDwIxcQ9o73jx3rfyaXTuXekkHPIxkAVFcGTtiso0hv8dSfElVwosDtsM 55nA/rfT0Iz6A9iRBz1UQZWQaLYbn3X8+t4SK/ioZNvSHCNSSvuPG8028klZkY9+vVzs /MwA== Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.0.41] (75-166-119-163.hlrn.qwest.net. [75.166.119.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d34sm16620190qta.18.2019.04.05.14.37.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 05 Apr 2019 14:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: is re-running bootstrap after a change safe? To: Jeff Law , Eric Botcazou Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <52db8781-a1f8-5fe1-7e05-ba3f984d9825@gmail.com> <2209859.RYDReTFH8C@polaris> From: Martin Sebor Message-ID: Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2019 21:37:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg00088.txt.bz2 On 4/5/19 3:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 4/5/19 2:50 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> Say if the first bootstrap succeeds and I then change a single >>> GCC .c file and rerun make bootstrap, am I guaranteed to see >>> the same fallout of the change as I would if I did a pristine >>> build in a clean directory? >> >> No, this would imply deleting the stage2 and stage3 compilers and that isn't >> what happens. Instead the compiler of each stage is updated in isolation. >> > RIght. Thus I always blow away stage2-* stage3-*, and stage1 target > directories along with the "compare" stamp file. Thanks (all of you). It's amazing that I have been getting away with it for all these years. Why is this not done automatically? I mean, what is the use case for make bootstrap without doing these steps first? Martin