Hi, Sean Whitton wrote: > On Wed 01 Aug 2018 at 10:47PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Thanks for reporting. My understanding from >> https://bugs.debian.org/628515 is that the intention is >> >> - print out compiler driver command lines, so that compiler errors are >> closely preceded with the command that produced them >> >> - no need to print out command lines for tools like ld that are >> themselves invoked by the compiler driver, but do print out those >> command lines if you invoke them directly >> >> I don't think verbosity for the sake of verbosity was ever a goal >> here, so ideas for better wording would be very welcome. >> >> In https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=628515;msg=30 >> I proposed wording along the lines of [... wording snipped ...] > IIRC my hope was to generalise the recommendation to apply to as many > different build systems as possible. For example, packages whose builds > do not involve any compilers and linkers. > > We could restore your text in a footnote or a "For example ..." > paragraph? Thanks. Unfortunately, that wouldn't address Clément's concern about maximal verbosity (1) not being consistent with reasonableness and (2) not being concrete enough to easily act on as a packager. Can we make it about not abbreviating build command lines, instead of maximal verbosity? For example, enabling more warnings might make a compiler produce more verbose output, but it isn't the goal of this requirement. Similarly, enabling compiler tracing might make a compiler produce more verbose output, and some people might even like that, but I don't believe that was the goal of this policy requirement. Hope that helps, Jonathan
