This should get us over the hump of activating basic ratcheting on codegen tests, at least. It also puts in place optional (disabled by default) ratcheting on all #[bench] tests, and records all metrics from them to harvestable .json files in any case.
When building Rust libraries (e.g. librustc, libstd, etc), checks for
and verbosely removes previous build products before invoking rustc.
(Also, when Make variable VERBOSE is defined, it will list all of the
libraries matching the object library's glob after the rustc
invocation has completed.)
When installing Rust libraries, checks for previous libraries in
target install directory, but does not remove them.
The thinking behind these two different modes of operation is that the
installation target, unlike the build tree, is not under the control
of this infrastructure and it is not up to this Makefile to decide if
the previous libraries should be removed.
Fixes#3225 (at least in terms of mitigating the multiple library
problem by proactively warning the user about it.)
This is a small follow-up fix to the previous commit: I needed
to quote the right-hand side of the definition for the variable
MATCHES, to handle the case where there are more than one previously
installed libraries in the target directory.
Namely, switched in many places to using GNU make provided functions
for directory listing and text processing, rather than spawning a
shell process to do that work.
In the process of the revision, learned about Target-specific
variables, which were very applicable to INSTALL_LIB (which, on a
per-recipe basis, was always receiving the same actual arguments for
its first two formal parameters in every invocation).
http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Target_002dspecific.html
(We might be able to make use of those in future refactorings.)
----
Also adds a cleanup pass to get-snapshot.py as well, since the same
problem arises when we unpack libraries from the snapshot archive into
a build directory with a prior snapshot's artifacts. (I put this step
into the python script rather than the makefile because I wanted to
delay the cleanup pass until after we have at least successfully
downloaded the tarball. That way, if the download fails, you should
not destroy the previous unarchived snapshot libraries and build
products.)
----
Also reverted whitespace changes to minimize diff.
I plan to put them back in in a dedicated commit elsewhere.
As per https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-July/004685.html
This is the initial machinery to setup the l10n infrastructure for markdown documentation.
A new "docs-l10n" target will take care of generating, updating and then building .pot and .po files, and later on the final .md.
This commit includes the .pot for all current .md docs; they can be feed directly to Mozilla Verbatim if wanted.
Please note that po4a only provides the orig.md -> .pot -> l10n.po -> l10n.md flow. The l10n.md -> l10n.html generation is not currently built in the makefile, as no language has been enabled.
This commit add a new "docs-l10n" make target which uses po4a to:
* create .pot (PO templates) from markdown doc
* update templates and po for enabled languages
* generate translated markdown for completed (> 80%) translations
Currently, no language has been activated.
Signed-off-by: Luca Bruno <lucab@debian.org>
When building Rust libraries (e.g. librustc, libstd, etc), checks for
and verbosely removes previous build products before invoking rustc.
(Also, when Make variable VERBOSE is defined, it will list all of the
libraries matching the object library's glob after the rustc
invocation has completed.)
When installing Rust libraries, checks for previous libraries in
target install directory, but does not remove them.
The thinking behind these two different modes of operation is that the
installation target, unlike the build tree, is not under the control
of this infrastructure and it is not up to this Makefile to decide if
the previous libraries should be removed.
This makes it possible for us to trigger the llvm-clean make-target by checking in a change that touches rustllvm/llvm-auto-clean-stamp. Most developers don't need to see or know about this, but when you push a change that "needs an LLVM rebuild", even if not otherwise obvious, this should give a mechanism to do it.
- Fix stat struct for Android (found by SEGV at run-pass/stat.rs)
- Adjust some test cases to rpass for Android
- Modify some script to rpass for Android
Apparently the standard --build and --host flags don't actually
_do_ anything. This re-uses the libuv flags, since they are the
same for getting jemalloc to cross-compile
Fix#6805: add --enable-ccache configure option to prefix compiler invocations with `ccache` to attempt to reuse common results, e.g. for LLVM (re)builds.
The information at developer [Note-ccache](../../wiki/Note-ccache) and at [ccache and clang concerns](http://petereisentraut.blogspot.fr/2011/09/ccache-and-clang-part-2.html) were what drove my introduction of the `-Qunused-arguments` and `CCACHE_CPP2` options. (Though I did confirm first-hand that at least the first really is necessary.)
Yes, one certainly can re-route how `gcc` and `clang` are resolved in one's PATH and use that as a way to invoke `ccache`. But I personally do not want to introduce that change to my own PATH, and this seems like a small enough change that it does not hurt to add it, at least for now. (I don't know what form it would take when we move over to `rustpkg`.)
Most of the relevant information can be found in the commit messages.
r? @brson - I just wanted to make sure the make changes aren't completely bogus
This would close#2400, #6517, and #6489 (although a run through incoming-full on linux would have to confirm the latter two)
