[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4] cutils: Provide strchrnul

From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4] cutils: Provide strchrnul
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 07:50:44 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)

Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:

> On 11 June 2018 at 08:56, Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> wrote:
>> You're not printing $strchrnul like we print other configuration
>> results.  Hmm, we're not printing several of them.  Question for
>> maintainers (MAINTAINERS doesn't have any, so I'm cc'ing the top three
>> coughed up by get_maintainer.pl): bug or feature?  If feature, how do we
>> decide what to print?
> If we printed everything that we tested for then the output would
> be unhelpfully enormous. My view is that we should print the
> "interesting" things for the user, ie the higher-level things
> that the user could potentially turn on by installing more
> libraries or has turned off explicitly or whatever. Reporting
> whether the host OS has strchrnul or whether we've had to
> provide our own implementation is doubly uninteresting:
>  * there's nothing the user could do to change this
>  * there is no visible effect (missing features, worse performance)

Care to clean out out existing "uninteresting" prints?

> There's an argument that we should also log every config check
> result somehow (I think autoconf configures do this), but I
> don't think that our 'print stuff to stdout' is the right place
> for that.

Makes sense.  Volunteers?

reply via email to

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