[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC] make output of compiling a bit less verbose to make warnings m
Re: [RFC] make output of compiling a bit less verbose to make warnings more visible
Wed, 03 Sep 2008 08:59:22 +0200
Am Dienstag, den 02.09.2008, 13:47 -0700 schrieb Colin D Bennett:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:43:54 +0300
> Vesa Jääskeläinen <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Robert Millan wrote:
> > > I don't remember that discussion well; ISTR I complained. Maybe
> > > that stopped it? Anyway, as long as it's user-selectable it's not
> > > a problem for me. Maybe I even end up using it ;-)
This only needs to be the default then you Robert will end up using
> I have held off on doing this with all new variables, because it would
> mean changing *every* reference to the toolchain variables. I found
> that by simply overriding them, it was really nonintrusive, in
> general. However, there were developers that objected to the
Honourly I'm exactly your opion.
The linux primary kernel Makefile clearly says how it works, I haven't
bothered to check the other files how exactly they implemented it. I
doubt that it would help me.
For grub2 these overrides seems to be the best solution as long as
nobody is willing/able to rewrite the whole build system.
There exists even a thing called `GNU automake' which converts
Makefile.am files to Makefile.in
I never used it though, so I don't really know if it would be easier
with it then in that ruby stuff currently used.
I'd really love to have this, but if these overrides are not acceptable
then I doubt we will have it ever.
I would need ages to find out how to do it with that ruby stuff or even
how to rewrite the whole build system :(
I myself wrote only some small little Makefiles not Makefile.am not
Makefile.in but a final small Makefile.
Re: [RFC] make output of compiling a bit less verbose to make warnings more visible, Javier Martín, 2008/09/02
Re: [RFC] make output of compiling a bit less verbose to make warnings more visible, Hans Lambermont, 2008/09/03