Re: [RFC] add regenerate Makefile target

On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 15:32, Christophe Lyon
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 16:34, Simon Marchi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/18/24 13:25, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > > Well the rule to regenerate Makefile.in (eg in in opcodes/) is a bit
> > > more complex
> > > than just calling automake. IIUC it calls automake --foreign it any of
> > > *.m4 file from $(am__configure_deps) that is newer than Makefile.in
> > > (with an early exit in the loop), does nothing if Makefile.am or
> > > doc/local.mk are newer than Makefile.in, and then calls 'automake
> > > --foreign Makefile'
> >
> > The rules looks complex because they've been generated by automake, this
> > Makefile.in is not written by hand.  And I guess automake has put
> > `--foreign` there because foreign is used in Makefile.am:
> Yes, I know :-)
>
> >
> >   AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = foreign no-dist
> >
> > But a simple call so `automake -f` (or `autoreconf -f`) just works, as
> > automake picks up the foreign option from AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS, so a human
> > or an external script who wants to regenerate things would probably just
> > use that.
>
> Indeed. I guess my concern is: if some change happens to
> Makefile.am/Makefile.in which would imply that 'autoreconf -f' would
> not work, how do we make sure autoregen.py (or whatever script) is
> updated accordingly? Or maybe whatever change is made to
> Makefile.am/Makefile.in, 'autoreconf -f' is supposed to handle it
> without additional flag?
>
I think I've just noticed a variant of this: if you look at
opcodes/Makefile.in, you can see that aclocal.m4 depends on
configure.ac (among others). So if configure.ac is updated, a
maintainer-mode rule in Makefile.in will call aclocal and regenerate
aclocal.m4.

However, autoregen.py calls aclocal only if configure.ac contains
AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS, which is not the case here.

That's probably a bug in opcode/configure.ac, but still the current
Makefile.in machinery would update aclocal.m4 as needed when
autoregen.py will not.

I haven't audited all configure.ac but there are probably other
occurrences of this.

Christophe

> >
> > > The bot I want to put in place would regenerate things as they are
> > > supposed to be, then build and run the testsuite to make sure that
> > > what is supposed to be committed would work (if the committer
> > > regenerates everything correctly)
> >
> > For your job, would it be fine to just force-regenerate everything and
> > ignore timestamps (just like the buildbot's autoregen job wants to do)?
> > It would waste a few cycles, but it would be much simpler.
> >
> Yes, that would achieve the purpose: be able to handle as many patches
> as possible in precommit-CI.
> And as described earlier, for binutils this currently means:
> autoregen
> confgure --enable-maintainer-mode
> make all (with a low -j value otherwise we have random build failures)
> and my proposal to workaround the problem with -j is to do
> make all-bfd all-libiberty regenerate -j1
> make all -j XXX
>
> Another possibility would be a policy change in how patches are
> submitted, to require that they contain all the autogenerated files.
>
>
> > Simon