[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: verbosity
From: |
Jason Kraftcheck |
Subject: |
Re: verbosity |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:10:19 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Icedove 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061220) |
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Christopher Sean Morrison wrote on Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 07:55:27PM CET:
>> Counterproductive presumptuous flamings aside, there are compelling
>> arguments on both sides of the issue for having or quelling verbose
>> compilation output.
>
> Yes, the flaming all helps nothing and contributes nothing. If you want
> to get support into Automake, you have to convince its maintainer, see
> <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2006-08/msg00024.html>
> and the message that started the thread for a patch homepage.
>
I don't understand why this is such a controversial issue. Just have
automake prefix all commands in rules that are not already prefixed with @
or - with $(PREFIX) (or some other variable.) Have default for PREFIX be
empty so the current behavior is unchanged. If someone wants to change
the output, they can redefine it with something like PREFIX="@echo
'building $@ ...'; ". Minimal makefile 'bloat', no change to the default
behavior, and the flexibility for the output to be whatever is desired.
- jason
- Re: verbosity, (continued)
- Re: verbosity, Christopher Sean Morrison, 2007/01/15