Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (probable 3)

[Phil Holmes]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Reinhold Kainhofer" <address@hidden>
To: <address@hidden>
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:40 PM
Subject: Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (probable 3)


> Am Sunday, 31. July 2011, 01:34:16 schrieb Graham Percival:
> > ** Proposal details
> >
> > When you run make or make doc,
> >
> >     * All output will be saved to various log files, with the
> >       exception of output directly from make(1).
> >     * By default, no other output will be displayed on the
> >       console, with one exception: if a build fails, we might
> >       display some portion(s) of log file(s) which give useful
> >       clues about the reason for the failure.
>
> I don't like this at all. This means that we won't see ANY warnings 
> triggered
> by snippets in the docs. Shouldn't we ensure that the examples in the
> documentation compile nicely without warnings (we shouldn't advocate code 
> that
> causes warnings!)?
>
> To see the warnings, you'll then have to wade through thousands of log 
> files...

make doc already produces hundreds of warnings.  It might be thousands, I've 
not counted.  I don't see anyone paying any attention to them.

The point is that most devs simply don't notice them - 1 warning line is 
less than .0002% of the output.  The aim is to reduce this pointless output 
and make it easier to focus on warnings, but we have to do it in ways that 
are possible.  This is what's proposed.  Please can we stop re-going over 
this and get to a point where I can do something?

--
Phil Holmes