|From:||Christopher Sean Morrison|
|Date:||Mon, 15 Jan 2007 13:55:27 -0500|
The point that seems to be repeatedly get made (I mean seriously, how many times a year does this question come up?) is to merely provide a means to make one vs the other the *default*, and not some absurd shell redirect. It's "absurd" because it doesn't provide what they asked for in the first place -- default behavior from their build system in an integration fashion (as opposed to some shell scripted or makefile wrapper hack). Adding the libtool silent flag or using the make silent option can help, but they comprehensively also do not provide what folks asked for in the first place either..
Most users appreciate it when things just work under expected default use, and the developers of course appreciate when there is minimal effort required on their part to set up that default configuration. If someone is even willing to take the time and effort and provide the modification/option for a silent or otherwise minimally verbose build, more power to them as it serves everyone's interest. You can get bit by having a compilation be too silent or by drowning the compiling users with detail. Having that option (e.g. as configure macro directives that autoconf, automake, and libtool consistently obey) doesn't mean everyone will have to use it, and could even be overridden at run-time regardless of the default a particular project seemed to prefer.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|