[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: make -s
From: |
Bob Rossi |
Subject: |
Re: make -s |
Date: |
Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:19:55 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) |
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 04:15:12PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 10 January 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Mike Frysinger wrote on Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 08:58:09PM CET:
> > > On Thursday 10 January 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > > What I meant was: even with
> > > > make -s LIBTOOLFLAGS=--silent
> > > >
> > > > there will be some leftover output done by libtool. If somebody wants
> > > > to fix that, be invited to provide a (complete) patch (best including
> > > > testsuite amend; the stresstest in Libtool HEAD would probably come in
> > > > handy).
> > > >
> > > > If you want all tools silenced which are called by make, then I suggest
> > > > to simply use
> > > > make >/dev/null || make
> > >
> > > well, we're after the automatic output going away, not intended output.
> >
> > So what's intended output? That by make, libtool is apparently not.
> > What about makeinfo, texi2dvi, dvips? autoconf/aclocal/automake reruns,
> > configure reruns? Are you suggesting each of them parse $MAKEFLAGS and
> > go silent with that, too?
> >
> > libtool need not be invoked by make alone. There are multitudinous
> > other build systems, some of which call libtool at times. Should
> > libtool parse their $TOOLFLAGS too?
> >
> > I merely think that MAKEFLAGS is for make, and other flags should be for
> > other programs. And hey, that's just my personal opinion, not cast in
> > stone or anything; but I would like to be shown why another choice is
> > better.
>
> i think we're focusing on the "big" offenders here. libtool is certainly
> much
> more prevalent than any other tool cited here when combined with autotools.
> taking that into consideration, the fact that libtool outputs status
> information that amounts pretty closely (almost exactly) to what make itself
> would output, the idea of having it be autosilenced according to -s is a
> common (and logical) expectation for people. i'm not saying this is grounds
> for "this must be done!", just putting it out there.
Exactly, I would think most people would not expect the current
behavior. I would say "Hey, I told make to be quit, but it's not."
Ingorance is bliss.
Bob Rossi