[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: silent installs

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: silent installs
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:33:29 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-10-28)

* Joakim Tjernlund wrote on Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 02:57:40PM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote on 2010/01/30 00:34:17:
> > First off, `make -s' is both POSIX and portable.  Conceptually, `make
> > -s' has nothing to do with the `silent-rules' option that recent
> Exactly, and I am asking for autotools/libtool not to output
> anything that isn't a real warning/error when when -s is passed to make.

Likely that won't happen.  It is ugly and hard to detect portably from
within a make rule whether -s has been passed to make.  It is so much
easier for you to just use
  make >/dev/null

for which this:

> After all, it is custom that stderr is reserved for errors/warnings only.

is another great argument.  ;-)

BTW, I often use
  make >/dev/null || make

if I don't use a build log, to see the final command verbosely.


reply via email to

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