[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (final)

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (final)
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 17:59:31 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 10:11:13AM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith OHara"
> <address@hidden>
> To: <address@hidden>; "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
> Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 9:31 PM
> Subject: Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (final)
> >Make does show warnings on the terminal right now.
> >  make -s bin
> >lets me find them, which makes me very happy.
> >
> >Only after the proposal is fully implemented, will a successful
> >build stop showing me the warnings.

Yes, that is true.  You may request additional warnings with the
  make VERBOSE=1

> There's no intention of stopping make showing errors.

Actually, a literal reading of the policy -- which is how I always
try to read policies -- states that there *is* an intention of not
showing gcc errors.

It is possible that we are talking about different things, though.
- we will still display errors from the make(1) program.  (first
  point under "proposal details")
- will will ***NOT*** display any errors from g++.  (second point)
  - exception: we ***MIGHT*** display some portion(s) of the
    relevant log file(s).  The policy uses the word "might" here,
    not "must".  There is a huge difference between those two words.

Please always remember that there is a difference between the
make(1) program, and other programs which are called by make(1).

... if we are still this unclear about precisely what the policy
states, then I think I'd better make a new draft of
GOP-PROP 5: build system output, send it here, and wait a few days
for more questions.  In particular, I will clarify the distinction
between make(1) and other programs.

Are other parts of the document unclear?  I'll ask again when I
post the new draft, but if anybody knows of a different area of
confusion, it would be great if I could clarify that in the same

- Graham

reply via email to

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