Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (probable decision)

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:07:29AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> I proposed to adopt the linux/git/automake convention of using silent
> rules so that you get something like
> 
>   make
>   CC lily/foo.c
>   ..
>   LB Documentation/web.texi
>   LB Documentation/notation.texi
> 
> or what you currently get when doing: make V=1 .
> 
> That's what everyone understands.

I have no clue what you're talking about, but I'll investigate.

> If you want silence and logging, why
> not just do something like
> 
>    nohup make &
> 
> or
> 
>    make >& mybuild.log
> 
> [optionally using tail -f, grep and sed -- or those rolled together in a
>  nice python script -- to get info on progress]

Oh?  Go and make an error in a @lilypond somewhere, then compile
from scratch, and tell me how easy it was to find the cause of the
errror using grep and sed.

> It almost seems to me someone is trying to hammer two different concepts
> into one system  Not only is that very non-unixy, it also seems this
> is a very lilypond-specific adaptation of the build system, which makes
> me suspicious.

What I'd like is for the lilypond build system to be like GUB.
GUB has a fantastic set of logs.  There's log files for the build
process.  There's log files for each package.  GUB gives you a
short snippet of the failure, and tells you where to find more
info.

As far as I'm concerned, this whole proporsal could be: "make the
lilypond build system output like GUB".  But that wouldn't be
understood by anybody other than you and me, so I need to describe
what GUB does.  :)

Cheers,
- Graham