[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: make doc

From: Phil Holmes
Subject: Re: make doc
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 11:03:21 +0100

----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl Sorensen" <address@hidden> To: "Graham Percival" <address@hidden>; "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 2:35 AM
Subject: Re: make doc

On 5/27/11 11:40 AM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 06:25:20PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
Is the aim with make docs to try to make it silent, unless there are
errors, like we have done with make website?

I think this is true only if we set a silent flag.  When make errors show
up, lots of times I have to look back quite a way to understand the source
of the error. If it were silent, there would certainly be less to look back through, but I think there would also be much less information to help track
down the problem.

The current (new) situation with make website is that it echoes make commands if run with a straight make website - it also displays a few progress notifications - "Processing web site: [fr]" for example. If it's run silent - "make -s website" it just shows those progress messages and currently 4 errors about missing links. Try it - you might be surprised...

That's the aim to replicate with docs. Also to understand and maybe streamline it?

Phil Holmes

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]