Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 12:03:52 +1000 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r396248 - head/games/scummvm Message-ID: <55EE4208.3020405@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <55EE412F.4080802@FreeBSD.org> References: <201509070625.t876PBJV079503@repo.freebsd.org> <663DB8E120502884DE748209@atuin.in.mat.cc> <20150907070846.GA23292@FreeBSD.org> <55EE412F.4080802@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/09/2015 12:00 PM, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > On 7/09/2015 5:08 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 08:46:51AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>> +--On 7 septembre 2015 06:25:11 +0000 Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> >>> wrote: >>> | New Revision: 396248 >>> | URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/396248 >>> | >>> | Log: >>> | - Ensure that build logs in bulk (package) mode are useful by passing >>> | the --enable-verbose-build argument to configure script >>> >>> Why not always make the logs useful ? If I go and run make, I'll have some >>> output that's useless for me to debug, right ? >> >> Typically yes, I agree; I also prefer to always have full logs. However, >> a lot of people prefer to see them when needed, not always; this perception >> could be popularized by Linux kernel build being quite by default, OpeWRT, >> etc. Our own Uses/cmake.mk defines CMAKE_VERBOSE for patch/package builds >> only. On the other hand, with pkg(8) and binary packages becoming widely >> adopted, perhaps we can assume that building from the ports is expert mode >> and thus --enable-verbose-build/CMAKE_VERBOSE=yes/etc. should be rightful >> default. >> >> I was trying to preserve existing defaults, yet not pessimize cluster logs >> usefullness. I think if we could have consensus among ports folks that we >> always prefer verbose logs, I'm all for removing the checks and just always >> pass it. In fact, this will make quite a few ports less cluttered. >> >> ./danfe >> > > That (preserving/respecting current defaults) is the right thing to do. > > I advocate verbose by default across the board in the ports I maintain > already. Our defaults should be conducive to debug-ability, particularly > for the case of users providing feedback for maintainers. > > How about we exp-run for GNU_CONFIGURE=yes ports: > > CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --disable-silent-rules > MAKE_ENV+= V=1 (maybe even MAKE_ARGS) > > OR: > > Templates/config.site = enable_silent_rules=no, and > MAKE_ENV+= V=1 (maybe even MAKE_ARGS) > > AND maybe even: > > Quoting from: > https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Automake-Silent-Rules.html > > "Still, notwithstanding the rationales above, a developer who really > wants to make silent rules enabled by default in his own package can do > so by calling AM_SILENT_RULES([yes]) in configure.ac. " > > Could we also REINPLACE_CMD that? > > Quoting relevant snippets from above link: > > Passing --enable-silent-rules to configure will cause build rules to be > less verbose; the option --disable-silent-rules will cause normal > verbose output." > > At make run time, the default chosen at configure time may be > overridden: make V=1 will produce verbose output, make V=0 less verbose > output. > > Also, in projects using libtool, the use of silent rules can > automatically enable the libtool’s --silent option > There's also no reason we couldn't wrap what we do in a user option/knob, so that builds could be made verbose/silent in particular cases, or at the users command. ./koobs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55EE4208.3020405>