Re: make automake less verbose (try 2)

2008-11-04 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Friday 2008-10-24 03:19, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >On Thursday 2008-10-23 19:20, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: [...] I noticed that AM_VERBOSE_YACC is not used when in the .l.c and .y.c rules. Do you know why? >>> ## In fast-dep mode, we can always use -o. >>> ## For non-suffix rules, we must emulate

Re: make automake less verbose (try 2)

2008-10-23 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Thursday 2008-10-23 19:20, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > >Anyway, when we use nonconforming constructs then it's probably safer if >they are default-off, so the developer can choose to enable it and knows >the limitation. I suppose we can have an Automake option 'silent' or so >(better name suggest

Re: make automake less verbose (try 2)

2008-10-23 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Jan, * Jan Engelhardt wrote on Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:07:52PM CEST: > > There have been a number of attempts at introducing a quiet behavior to > automake, much like the Linux kernel's kbuild does. And this one looks quite a bit better than the last, I must say. Thank you! I will queue this

make automake less verbose (try 2)

2008-10-23 Thread Jan Engelhardt
There have been a number of attempts at introducing a quiet behavior to automake, much like the Linux kernel's kbuild does. Reference: http://osdir.com/ml/sysutils.automake.patches/2007-07/msg00024.html (and others linked from the thread) Known previous attempts always either were POSIX-incompli