On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 08:19 +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
However, if the second position-dependent run fails
(compiler bug, usually, but could also be running out of disk space) it
will fail without any error message being printed.
Yes. Have you actually hit a compiler bug that way before? I think
it's much more likely that the set of warnings is different rather
than a failure, but others may have a different experience.
Yes; the issue that prompted this was an incident[1] where the -fPIC
pass compiled without any warnings at all, while the non-fPIC pass was
generating a spurious warning[2] - that wouldn't have been a problem,
but the maintainers had decided that the package should always be
compiled with -Werror.
It's a tiny corner case, I know - but if I've been bitten then certainly
other people will have seen this and not had the patience to debug it.
Would it make sense to capture output from the second compilation
instead of discarding it, then print it if the second compilation fails?
Suggested patch against HEAD. It costs one more fork of `rm' per
compile, and makes the typical echoed command line longer, but saves
the user from having to type something like
make || env CFLAGS='... -no-suppress' make -e
WDYT? (Adding Ed to THANKS not shown.)
That looks great, thanks!
Ed
1. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196103
2. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29478
___
Bug-libtool mailing list
Bug-libtool@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
