[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:17:35 +0200
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:220.127.116.11pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-2.7.b4.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b4
On 10/14/2009 02:58 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
According to Ralf Corsepius on 10/13/2009 9:20 AM:
What work does it cause except for using --disable-silent-rules at
configure time or V=1 at make time?
Exactly this is the problem.
The problem isn't the support for silent rules. The problem is that
some packages are enabling it by default
But YOU can still disable it by default, by writing your packaging
automation tools to supply --disable-silent-rules as part of calling
./configure, and/or writing an appropriate config.site. In other words,
the person running ./configure STILL has the option to choose YOUR desired
default, even if it is different than the package author's desired
Exactly what I said in a previous mail: Automake is pushing around
package maintainers to modify their packages to automake's behavioral
changes. (Here package maintainer == Package installers)
> The use of silent-rules is an option, not a mandate.
IMO, upstream maintainers, who use silent rules, don't have much clues
about what they are doing - Their practice is harmful.
- silent-rules (was: checking automake version in configure.ac), Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/10/06
- Re: silent-rules, Ralf Corsepius, 2009/10/13
- Re: silent-rules, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/10/14
- Re: silent-rules, Bob Friesenhahn, 2009/10/14
- Re: silent-rules, Ralf Corsepius, 2009/10/15
- Re: silent-rules, Yavor Doganov, 2009/10/15
- Re: silent-rules, Bob Friesenhahn, 2009/10/15
- Re: silent-rules, Ralf Corsepius, 2009/10/14
- Re: silent-rules, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/10/15