GNU bug report logs - #12501
Automake generated makefiles can be less verbose when building with silent rules

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 12501 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Hib Eris <hib <at> hiberis.nl>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Subject: Automake generated makefiles can be less verbose when building with
	silent rules
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:35:26 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi all,

I think Automake generated makefiles can be a little less verbose when
building with silent rules.
Please consider attached patch.

Thanks,

Hib Eris

[0001-Do-not-echo-targets-when-building-with-silent-rules.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 12501 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Hib Eris <hib <at> hiberis.nl>
Cc: 12501 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#12501: Automake generated makefiles can be less verbose when
	building with silent rules
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 17:09:36 +0200

tags 12501 + moreinfo
severity 12501 wishlist
thanks

On 09/24/2012 09:35 AM, Hib Eris wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I think Automake generated makefiles can be a little less verbose when
> building with silent rules.
> Please consider attached patch.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Hib Eris
>
> From b1ab343e3e5c83e3da99a34924acf9c68bd4ee72 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Hib Eris <hib <at> hiberis.nl>
> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:29:56 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Do not echo targets when building with silent rules
>
> ---
> automake.in       |    2 +-
> lib/am/subdirs.am |    2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/automake.in b/automake.in
> index b165855..5b383a0 100644
> --- a/automake.in
> +++ b/automake.in
> @@ -4476,7 +4476,7 @@ sub handle_all ($)
> 	# things explicitly.
> 	$output_all .= ("all: @local_headers"
> 			. "\n\t"
> -			. '$(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) '
> +			. '$(AM_V_at)$(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) '
> 			. (var ('SUBDIRS') ? 'all-recursive' : 'all-am')
> 			. "\n\n");
>         depend ('.MAKE', 'all');
> diff --git a/lib/am/subdirs.am b/lib/am/subdirs.am
> index 005483a..b430d21 100644
> --- a/lib/am/subdirs.am
> +++ b/lib/am/subdirs.am
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ $(am__recursive_targets):
>  	  *) list='$(SUBDIRS)' ;; \
> 	esac; \
> 	for subdir in $$list; do \
> -	  echo "Making $$target in $$subdir"; \
> +	  $(AM_V_P) && echo "Making $$target in $$subdir"; \
>  	  if test "$$subdir" = "."; then \
> 	    dot_seen=yes; \
> 	    local_target="$$target-am"; \
> -- 1.7.5.4
>
Hmm...  I fear that this change would actually make the makefile
output *too* silent, possibly impeding debugging or problem diagnosis
in a serious way.  But I'm not sure if this is actually the case,
or if I'm just being overly wary.  Would any other automaker like
to chime in with his opinion?

Anyway, the best way to make an "informed decision" would be to try
out Automake, patched with this diff, on few real-world package (GNU
coreutils and GNU autoconf comes to mind), with GNU and non-GNU make
implementations alike, and seeing how the make output looks when
everything goes smoothly, and then how it looks when there are errors
(e.g., errors compiling a file, permission errors modifying or
creating a file, and even syntax errors in a subdir Makefile).  Would
you be willing to give this experiment a try, later posting here the
output and impressions you get?  This might be overkill for such a
minor change however ...

Waiting for feedback,
  Stefano

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.