Re: GOP-PROP 5: build system output (probable 2?)

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:33:04AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
> 
> > I still don't feel that we have any kind of consensus on this.
> > Here's an updated proposal.
> 
> So what if we add a --log option to lilypond-book (and probably
> to lilypond), that [always in verbose mode?] writes individual
> .log files alongside the output.  Would this fix 90% of this
> proposal?

You mean, like
  23cdda9506931d5b9a1e75ee8be8b74f9084a7c0
?

I'd call it 20% rather than 90%, but yes, Phil's work on
lilypond-book will certainly be valuable!

> I can imagine also adding stepmake rules to handle V=0 for
> c/c++ compilation.  Possibly not logging that would be OK,
> because a new compile with V=1 would almost instantly show
> the problem?

I don't agree.  Log files are cheap; I think we should always
write the logfiles -- but I'd be ok if we had a special option to
omit writing logfiles if the user really really wants that.

Cheers,
- Graham