On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:07:29AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > I proposed to adopt the linux/git/automake convention of using silent > rules so that you get something like > > make > CC lily/foo.c > .. > LB Documentation/web.texi > LB Documentation/notation.texi > > or what you currently get when doing: make V=1 . > > That's what everyone understands.
I have no clue what you're talking about, but I'll investigate. > If you want silence and logging, why > not just do something like > > nohup make & > > or > > make >& mybuild.log > > [optionally using tail -f, grep and sed -- or those rolled together in a > nice python script -- to get info on progress] Oh? Go and make an error in a @lilypond somewhere, then compile from scratch, and tell me how easy it was to find the cause of the errror using grep and sed. > It almost seems to me someone is trying to hammer two different concepts > into one system Not only is that very non-unixy, it also seems this > is a very lilypond-specific adaptation of the build system, which makes > me suspicious. What I'd like is for the lilypond build system to be like GUB. GUB has a fantastic set of logs. There's log files for the build process. There's log files for each package. GUB gives you a short snippet of the failure, and tells you where to find more info. As far as I'm concerned, this whole proporsal could be: "make the lilypond build system output like GUB". But that wouldn't be understood by anybody other than you and me, so I need to describe what GUB does. :) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
