2010/10/25 Arjen de Korte > Citeren Charles Lepple > > > We might want to keep the silent option off for Buildbot compilation >> because it hides a lot of the flags - that might make it harder to figure >> out things like the "overlinking" problem. >> > > I certainly wouldn't want to run the Buildbot compilation with silent build > enabled. > > I'm also uncertain which audience we try to reach with this. Do packagers > really complain about the build process being too verbose? In case of > problems, more output is usually better than virtually no output. And if you > really feel lucky, there is always the option of sending all warning > messages and/or debug output to /dev/null. What is the whole point of this?
to answer your questions: - we are targeting and trying to solve the same things as the linux kernel (and the like) does: not that much! general compilation is more readable (if it can), warning are seen more easily, ... - full verbose output are still available, but apart from advanced users and the team, who need that? - the buildbot would obviously still be in verbose mode by default, so adding "--disable-silent-rules" to DISTCHECK_FLAGS and DISTCHECK_LIGHT_FLAGS - support instructions for compilation will also require either configure with "--disable-silent-rules" or "make V=1" cheers, Arnaud
_______________________________________________ Nut-upsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
