Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 17:27 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. Signed-off-by: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com series is Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net -- Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net eric.anh...@intel.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
From: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:27:27 -0700 Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. I think this is too early. There is no OpenBSD port/package for automake-1.11 yet. ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
Le 06/10/2009 11:19, Mark Kettenis a écrit : I think this is too early. There is no OpenBSD port/package for automake-1.11 yet. http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/util/macros/tree/xorg-macros.m4.in#n457 1.11 isn't mandatory, the macro enables silent rules if they are found. Cheers, Rémi ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 11:29:57 +0200, Rémi Cardona wrote: Le 06/10/2009 11:19, Mark Kettenis a écrit : I think this is too early. There is no OpenBSD port/package for automake-1.11 yet. http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/util/macros/tree/xorg-macros.m4.in#n457 1.11 isn't mandatory, the macro enables silent rules if they are found. Additionally as long as one is building from tarballs and the person releasing had automake-1.11 on the system, then there should be no loss of functionality. regards, guillem ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
Mark Kettenis wrote: From: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:27:27 -0700 Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. I think this is too early. There is no OpenBSD port/package for automake-1.11 yet. Well, then you have approximately 6 months to get one, *iff* you want to be able to have quieter build logs when building directly from git or after patching a tarball in such a way that you have to re-run automake. That's why I'm proposing this at the start of the 1.8 cycle, so we've got time to both get it fully tested and to get OS/distro maintainers to get ready for it. If you don't mind noisier build logs (cc -D... -D.. -I... -I... -c foo.c insead of CC foo.c), or only build tarballs produced by upstream without autoreconf'ing, then you should still be able to use automake 1.9 or 1.10. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 07:42:33AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Mark Kettenis wrote: From: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:27:27 -0700 Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. I think this is too early. There is no OpenBSD port/package for automake-1.11 yet. Well, then you have approximately 6 months to get one, *iff* you want to be able to have quieter build logs when building directly from git or after patching a tarball in such a way that you have to re-run automake. That's why I'm proposing this at the start of the 1.8 cycle, so we've got time to both get it fully tested and to get OS/distro maintainers to get ready for it. If you don't mind noisier build logs (cc -D... -D.. -I... -I... -c foo.c insead of CC foo.c), or only build tarballs produced by upstream without autoreconf'ing, then you should still be able to use automake 1.9 or 1.10. Alternately, you could just generate autotools files on a more up-to-date OS, and use only the generated files on OpenBSD. Cheers, Daniel pgpcLtWaZ2LnR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 05:27:27PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings
generated.
This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b.
shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers
distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will
require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise.
Signed-off-by: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com
---
.gitignore |2 -
configure.ac |7
m4/shave.m4 | 73 -
shave-libtool.in | 69 ---
shave.in | 86
--
5 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 237 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 m4/shave.m4
delete mode 100644 shave-libtool.in
delete mode 100644 shave.in
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 3a8fe50..108cfe6 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -35,8 +35,6 @@ install-sh
libtool
ltmain.sh
missing
-shave
-shave-libtool
TAGS
tags
cscope*
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index eab315d..f4089c8 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -32,11 +32,6 @@ AC_CONFIG_SRCDIR([Makefile.am])
AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([dist-bzip2 foreign])
AM_MAINTAINER_MODE
-AC_CONFIG_FILES([
- shave
- shave-libtool
-])
-
# Require xorg-macros version 1.2.0 or newer for XORG_CHANGELOG and
# XORG_CWARNFLAGS
m4_ifndef([XORG_MACROS_VERSION], [AC_FATAL([must install xorg-macros 1.2 or
later before running autoconf/autogen])])
@@ -2003,8 +1998,6 @@ AC_SUBST([prefix])
XORG_MANPAGE_SECTIONS
XORG_CHANGELOG
-SHAVE_INIT([.], [enable])
-
AC_OUTPUT([
Makefile
glx/Makefile
diff --git a/m4/shave.m4 b/m4/shave.m4
deleted file mode 100644
index 0c2c9f5..000
--- a/m4/shave.m4
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,73 +0,0 @@
-dnl Make automake/libtool output more friendly to humans
-dnl
-dnl SHAVE_INIT([shavedir],[default_mode])
-dnl
-dnl shavedir: the directory where the shave scripts are, it defaults to
-dnl $(top_builddir)
-dnl default_mode: (enable|disable) default shave mode. This parameter
-dnl controls shave's behaviour when no option has been
-dnl given to configure. It defaults to disable.
-dnl
-dnl * SHAVE_INIT should be called late in your configure.(ac|in) file (just
-dnl before AC_CONFIG_FILE/AC_OUTPUT is perfect. This macro rewrites CC and
-dnl LIBTOOL, you don't want the configure tests to have these variables
-dnl re-defined.
-dnl * This macro requires GNU make's -s option.
-
-AC_DEFUN([_SHAVE_ARG_ENABLE],
-[
- AC_ARG_ENABLE([shave],
-AS_HELP_STRING(
- [--enable-shave],
- [use shave to make the build pretty [[default=$1]]]),,
- [enable_shave=$1]
-)
-])
-
-AC_DEFUN([SHAVE_INIT],
-[
- dnl you can tweak the default value of enable_shave
- m4_if([$2], [enable], [_SHAVE_ARG_ENABLE(yes)], [_SHAVE_ARG_ENABLE(no)])
-
- if test x$enable_shave = xyes; then
-dnl where can we find the shave scripts?
-m4_if([$1],,
- [shavedir=$ac_pwd],
- [shavedir=$ac_pwd/$1])
-AC_SUBST(shavedir)
-
-dnl make is now quiet
-AC_SUBST([MAKEFLAGS], [-s])
-AC_SUBST([AM_MAKEFLAGS], ['`test -z $V echo -s`'])
-
-dnl we need sed
-AC_CHECK_PROG(SED,sed,sed,false)
-
-dnl substitute libtool
-SHAVE_SAVED_LIBTOOL=$LIBTOOL
-LIBTOOL=${SHELL} ${shavedir}/shave-libtool '${SHAVE_SAVED_LIBTOOL}'
-AC_SUBST(LIBTOOL)
-
-dnl substitute cc/cxx
-SHAVE_SAVED_CC=$CC
-SHAVE_SAVED_CXX=$CXX
-SHAVE_SAVED_FC=$FC
-SHAVE_SAVED_F77=$F77
-CC=${SHELL} ${shavedir}/shave cc ${SHAVE_SAVED_CC}
-CXX=${SHELL} ${shavedir}/shave cxx ${SHAVE_SAVED_CXX}
-FC=${SHELL} ${shavedir}/shave fc ${SHAVE_SAVED_FC}
-F77=${SHELL} ${shavedir}/shave f77 ${SHAVE_SAVED_F77}
-AC_SUBST(CC)
-AC_SUBST(CXX)
-AC_SUBST(FC)
-AC_SUBST(F77)
-
-V=@
- else
-V=1
- fi
- Q='$(V:1=)'
- AC_SUBST(V)
- AC_SUBST(Q)
-])
-
diff --git a/shave-libtool.in b/shave-libtool.in
deleted file mode 100644
index 488c657..000
--- a/shave-libtool.in
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,69 +0,0 @@
-#!/bin/sh
-
-# we need sed
-s...@sed@
-if test -z $SED ; then
-SED=sed
-fi
-
-lt_unmangle ()
-{
- last_result=`echo $1 | $SED -e 's#.libs/##' -e
's#[0-9a-zA-Z_\-\.]*_la-##'`
-}
-
-# the real libtool to use
-LIBTOOL=$1 --tag=CC
-shift
-
-# if 1, don't print anything, the underlaying wrapper will do it
-pass_though=0
-
-# scan the arguments, keep the right ones for libtool, and discover the mode
-preserved_args=
-while test $# -gt 0; do
-opt=$1
-shift
-
-case $opt in
---mode=*)
-mode=`echo $opt | $SED -e 's/[-_a-zA-Z0-9]*=//'`
-preserved_args=$preserved_args $opt
-;;
--o)
-lt_output=$1
-
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. Signed-off-by: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com This and the other 2 seem reasonable and look correct. However, does there need to be a follow up to enable the automake silent rules? Acked-by: Dan Nicholson dbn.li...@gmail.com -- Dan ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:58:10PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. Signed-off-by: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com This and the other 2 seem reasonable and look correct. However, does there need to be a follow up to enable the automake silent rules? I sneaked that into the the XORG_CWARNFLAGS with macros 1.3. Cheers, Peter ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove shave now that automake-1.11 has AM_SILENT_RULES
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 9:06 PM, Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net wrote: On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:58:10PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Revert Add shave so that we can see the steaming piles of warnings generated. This reverts commit 181cc08c8908a119fc403f970dea8cc98d3e0b9b. shave was left in the xserver 1.7 release/branch to allow developers distros time to transition to automake-1.11. xserver 1.8 series will require automake-1.11 for silencing build noise. Signed-off-by: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com This and the other 2 seem reasonable and look correct. However, does there need to be a follow up to enable the automake silent rules? I sneaked that into the the XORG_CWARNFLAGS with macros 1.3. Ah, I'd forgot about that. -- Dan ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
