Re: [PATCHES] gnu: linux-libre: Update to 4.16

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello,

Chris Marusich <address@hidden> skribis:

> Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> So, we still have a decision to make: whether to delete these generated
>> files (possibly in a snippet) to avoid using pre-generated non-source
>> files in our build.  I would be in favor of it.
>>
>> I'd like to hear opinions on this.

I’d be in favor of removing these, especially since that seems to be an
easy change, but…

> Perhaps we can consider our existing packages as a precedent.  Many
> packages include files in their source distribution that were
> auto-generated by the Autotools.  For example, consider the "configure"
> script that Autoconf generates.  Is there a significant difference
> between the "configure" script and the "pre-generated non-source files"
> you're talking about?

Indeed, there’s a long tradition in GNU to ship generated code to
facilitate bootstrapping.  There’s configure, Makefile.in, etc., and
there’s also Bison- and Flex-generated files often.

I have mixed feelings about this.  I think it’s great to be able to use
these pre-generated files; our bootstrap graph would be much more
complicated or even out of reach if we were to re-generate everything.
OTOH, it’s true that this is the elephant in the room in terms of
bootstrapping.

Maybe it’s a can of worms we’d rather leave aside.  :-)

Thoughts?

Ludo’.