From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C9FD1F4B4 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 04:20:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237759AbhA0D65 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 22:58:57 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:60042 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S317048AbhA0Bj2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:39:28 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA889E402; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:38:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=lHNxba/VymFI OW5mUv5RVs3Ie8Q=; b=nzrEPtLm/gRngK6rU2nyZlyOQGo4g7RK7QMo5rbh042b iv1P8fhG6yrmTfKZKm2pGMcnSVjHxfQ0lAIX/RJyDowqnoK8jhuUXGvDrjMpgqey VAhH25MU+1H4KqJ78WYWBSucLMrB9RA9jhAnsBEzMJfJvN7cWvX1Eu8BsyZts2E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=hvaxcw NaxooaJ4gb50NMei0Zyl26FgLIMslyMis1f1+ZB2LnGI2nf1SmLOSYAXZWjry5t9 UUV+TJkRLICgWW/WjMgCAycSUibfkN2aNDoCaHmKPC8So63bmKQLHU86d9vKjR2F cj1glXbZFt81xNwe0MYUzciZTZLTzUeXWbAzU= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46699E401; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:38:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 421989E400; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:38:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Makefile: micro-optimize light non-test builds References: <20210126160708.20903-1-avarab@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:38:08 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 26 Jan 2021 16:16:37 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4F7FFB3E-6040-11EB-B613-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 05:07:04PM +0100, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 = Bjarmason wrote: > >> This small series speeds up builds where you just want to get to a >> working "git" binary, but don't care about running git's own tests, or >> about making/installing fallbacks for "git svn" et al (which we do >> even with NO_PERL). > > I have to wonder if you really care about non-builtins here. If not, > then doesn't "make git" do what you want? I had the same thought, while wondering if all the ugliness in [4/4] is really worth it. The steps 2/4 and 3/4 did look like a useful feature, but I wonder why we even need to introduce NO_TEST_TOOLS in the first place. Wouldn't it be more natural to arrange them to be built by making "test::" target depend on them? IOW, why do we need to have "all::" (our default) target depend on them? And if we are not doing [4/4], I suspect [1/4], while it is not bad as a clean-up, would become less attractive. So...