Re: replacing ldefs-boot.el

[Phillip Lord]

Noam Postavsky <address@hidden> writes:
>> Actually, it should be *necessary* exactly as often as now. We need a
>> certain number of autoloads to bootstrap. Both ldefs-boot-auto and
>> ldefs-boot provide these. But ldefs-boot provides many more as well.
>
> Yes, and sometimes the extra ones that ldefs-boot provides could
> become necessary. In that case there wouldn't be a need to regenerate
> because they're already there. When using ldefs-boot-auto we would
> need to regenerate.
>
> Does that sound right?

Yes, that's true. This might occur, for example, if a file is re-ordered
so that a new function is hit first.

My suspision is that once we have a clear idea of the functions that are
used during bootstrap, this would happen rarely.

>>> Right. And I think the definitions you put would let make run them in
>>> parallel, thus breaking things.
>>
>>
>> bootstrap: | bootstrap-clean bootstrap-build
>>
>> ?
>
> I think it should be
>
> bootstrap: bootstrap-clean bootstrap-build
> boostrap-build: | bootstrap-clean

Ta!

Phil