Re: What's the deal with the module system?

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:08:28PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> I am talking about "make test" here.  I think that catching this error
>> and producing "
>> Texi2HTML call failed, maybe because of a mismatch in required
>> versions.  If you don't need HTML, try the makefile target doc-stage-1
>> if make doc failed for you, and try test-nodoc if make test failed for
>> you" will save unsuspecting users hours each and will cost one developer
>> half an hour to implement.
>
> Well, we've had this issue for a while:
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=775
> (the actual item was only added in June, but it's bugged me for
> years)
>
>> You don't even need to trap this error in high language, but can just do
>> this as part of bailing out for non-zero exit codes in the Makefile.
>
> Patches most definitely accepted.  I don't know how to check exit
> codes in makefiles.

You don't.  You do it as part of the shell command.  Something
like

mycommand || { echo "Oops, this failed!"; exit 1 ; }

> In general, it might be interesting to look at all
> "type-maintainability" issues.  Almost all of them hinder lilypond
> development, but few people want to work on fixing them.
> Complaining about these issues will not be helpful.

I have a hard time finding out just _what_ will be helpful.  You might
say "putting up things on Rietveld".  But it is not that I got much of a
response for that either, at least not in proportion to the people
telling me how important that would be.

-- 
David Kastrup