[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 4/4] New automake command line option `--silent-rules'.
From: |
Jan Engelhardt |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 4/4] New automake command line option `--silent-rules'. |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Mar 2009 22:55:02 +0100 (CET) |
User-agent: |
Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23) |
On Wednesday 2009-03-11 22:43, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>* Jan Engelhardt wrote on Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 09:34:20PM CET:
>> On Wednesday 2009-03-11 21:06, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>> > Do we want to allow a command line knob (--silent-rules) to turn
>> > off `silent' mode, or do we force developers to either touch the
>> > AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS variable in Makefile.am or the AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE
>> > macro call in configure.ac?
>>
>> Hm, what is the difference between silent and silent-rules?
>
>The command line option --silent-rules does the same as the argument
>`silent' to the AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE macro in configure.ac:
> AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([silent])
>
>Both enable silent mode for all Makefile.in files.
Hm that's a bit unintuitive. One can run `automake -Wall` from the
command line, and one can put -Wall into AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE().
One can use --foreign as a CLI argument, and AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS=foreign
(and probably AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([foreign])).
But introducing two names for silent/silent-rules, well.. ick.
>The reason that the command line option is not called `--silent' is that
>normally, i.e., with several other GNU software, --silent is the
>opposite of --verbose, and changes the verbosity of the command. But
>--silent-rules does not change the verbosity of the automake command.
Yeah I thought so. In that case, I would avoid using silent at all
and consistently use silent-rules throughout.
- Re: [PATCH 4/4] New automake command line option `--silent-rules'., (continued)