[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: silent installs

From: Ralf Corsepius
Subject: Re: silent installs
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:21:46 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100120 Fedora/3.0.1-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.1

On 01/29/2010 09:05 AM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

Is there a reason why the install target doesn't respect make -s?

I would really like to see autotools and libtool respect make -s.
What for?

When a developer asks for a silent build in order to catch problems
all one should see is real warnings and problems.

Silent make rules are harmful:

- Bogus defines
- Bogus include/library paths
- Incorrect CFLAGS/...
- link library order
typically do not show up as compiler warnings or errors.

Silent building is only appropriate when a user knows what he is doing and when explicitly asking of it. When getting used to doing so rsp. when making silent make-rules the default, packages tend to gradually rott, because bugs tend to slip through unnoticed.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]