[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: silent installs

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: silent installs
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:47:40 -0500

   > I was refering to AM_SILENT_RULES, which supresses `make all'
   > output; so this is not a very controversial topic, it is already
   > in automake and used by several projects.  Would you like to work
   > on this feature?  The maintainers can't accept a patch that
   > doesn't exist after all...

   I am afraid I not very handy with the program language skills
   needed for this. The best I can do is a small patch to
   for the most trivial part. Getting rid of the install msgs is over
   my head.

You don't need that much programming skills to fix this, infact, all
the scaffolding is in place.  Take a look in automake/lib/am/
and automake/lib/am/, and the %SILENT% macro; you'd need to
replace occurences of `echo' with a variable (since we cannot just use
@ to silence the rules), that expands to either : (though, I think
"INSTALL file" would be nicer than complete silence) or echo depending
on if are using V=0 or V=1.

   ---        (revision 57662)
   +++        (working copy)
   @@ -2028,7 +2028,7 @@
               relink_command=`$ECHO "X$relink_command" | $Xsed -e 

   -      func_warning "relinking \`$file'"
   +      $opt_silent || func_warning "relinking \`$file'"

The problem with this approach is that is part of libtool,
and doen't inherit (as far as I remeber) and of the rule you pass to
automake/make.  So one would need to pass down something via automake
to libtool, which might get cumbersome. :-(

Also, you'd probobly want to put the check in func_warning anyway, that
way you'd silence all invocations of func_warning.

Sadly, I don't have the source here to whip up a patch; but it is a
easy patch that I'm confident you can do by yourself :-)

reply via email to

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