GNU bug report logs - #8662
check_JAVA does not support silent rules

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 8662 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 8662 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

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

From: Petteri Räty <betelgeuse <at> gentoo.org>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Subject: check_JAVA does not support silent rules
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 15:07:36 +0300

relevant file snippets:

configure.ac:
AM_SILENT_RULES([yes])

Makefile.am:
check_JAVA = Hello.java

Now with make check you get output:

CLASSPATH=.:./.:$CLASSPATH javac -d . Hello.java
echo timestamp > classcheck.stamp

As all sources are compiled with one command a silent javac output could
be for example just

  JAVAC

This would match the output for files other types like CC and CXX.

Message #8 received at 8662 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Petteri Räty <betelgeuse <at> gentoo.org>
Cc: 8662 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#8662: check_JAVA does not support silent rules
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 22:38:07 +0200

severity: wishlist
thanks

On Thursday 12 May 2011, Petteri Räty wrote:
> relevant file snippets:
> 
> configure.ac:
> AM_SILENT_RULES([yes])
> 
> Makefile.am:
> check_JAVA = Hello.java
> 
> Now with make check you get output:
> 
> CLASSPATH=.:./.:$CLASSPATH javac -d . Hello.java
> echo timestamp > classcheck.stamp
> 
> As all sources are compiled with one command a silent javac output could
> be for example just
> 
>   JAVAC
> 
> This would match the output for files other types like CC and CXX.
> 
 
Hello Petteri, thanks for the report.

I'm re-labelling it as a 'wishlist', because what it highlighs is
"just" an automake limitation, rather than an "intrinsic" bug.

Also note that your report prompted me to think about a more general
incompleteness of the current APIs for the 'silent-rules' support;
for more info (in case you are interested), see:
 <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8665>

Thanks,
  Stefano

Message #13 received at 8662 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: "automake-patches <at> gnu.org" <automake-patches <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 8540 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Petteri Räty <betelgeuse <at> gentoo.org>,
 tsuna <tsunanet <at> gmail.com>, Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>,
 9088 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 8662 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Make clear the JAVA primary will no longer be developed,
 not even for bug fixes.
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 15:47:49 +0100

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

tags 8540 + wontfix
tags 8662 + wontfix
close 8540
close 8662
stop

References:
<http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8662>
<http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8540>

The existing java support in Automake is (with the JAVA primary) is
botched and hardly usable, so I'd rather declare it frozen and spend
no more time on it.  The right direction for a better Java support
in automake is likely to implement the proposed new JARS primary:
<http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9088>

The attached patch enhances the manual to make it clear that the
JAVA primary support is to be considered frozen, and will not even
receive bug fixes.

Unfortunately, I will have no time to attempt that implementation
myself in the foreseeable future, but I sill hope someone else will
find the time and motivation to give it a shot.

Anyway, I'm closing the bugs referring to the old JAVA primary as
"Will not fix", to try to reduce the clutter in the Automake bug
tracker.

Thanks,
  Stefano

[0001-docs-make-clear-the-JAVA-primary-is-frozen.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Previous Next

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