Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
In general, I like Gabe's suggestions. One thing that's not included here is SLICC. We'll need to add that one too. It would of course be rather trivial to make this somewhat configurable, though I'm not sure it's worth it, unless we can't agree. Nate Here are my renaming suggestions. The first alternative is if we restrict tags to 7 characters which seems to be what Linux was doing judging by the spacing in the commands from the Makefile. The second alternative is if we go with arbitrarily long but reasonable tags. The right answer might be somewhere between the two alternatives. If what I've got here sucks and you have a better idea, please suggest it. C - CC - CC CC - CXX - CXX AS - AS - AS SW - SWIG - SWIG AR - AR - AR LN - LD - LD RN - RANLIB - RANLIB M4 - M4 - M4 GN - HEADER - SWITCH_HDR IA - THE_ISA - THE_ISA DF - DEFINES - DEFINES_PY IF - INFO_PY - INFO_PY SM - C_PARAM - SIMOBJ_PARAM SG - S_PARAM - SWIG_PARAM ES - C_ENUM - ENUM_STRS EW - S_ENUM - ENUM_PARAM PM - B_PARAM - PARAM How specifically is this different from SG? SW - SWIG - SWIG TF - TRACE - TRACE_FLAGS EP - P_EMBED - EMBED_PY ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Feel free to propose some more verbose names, but the whole idea is to remove the verbosity. Almost everything but [CC] and [SW] else gets executed once per build. If there is an error it's going to be pretty obvious where it came from, especially with GN where it's just a simple replacement of Generating: with [GN]. Honestly, how many people do you think will be messing with the parser? It's less than 5. We've run out of ISAs at this point. The only ISAs that come to mind at the moment are PARISC and IA64. One is dead and the other might as well be. A few things come to mind. 1) I think slightly more verbose names are OK and probably good. We've cut down significantly on the verbosity already, so we can add some back. 2) One thing that needs to be thought about is SOURCE vs TARGET. It seems that we should always use one or the other, no? My guess is that we should always use $TARGET. (Should we use both?) 3) If we choose $SOURCE, should it be from the actual source directory (i.e. not the BUILDDIR copy), or not? 4) I think we should strip BUILDDIR from the output (which for many people is just build/, but for me is much longer). Stripping build/ adds room for #2. I sent Ali code for this. (And I just realized that there is better code so talk to me) Nate ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Quoting nathan binkert n...@binkert.org: Feel free to propose some more verbose names, but the whole idea is to remove the verbosity. Almost everything but [CC] and [SW] else gets executed once per build. If there is an error it's going to be pretty obvious where it came from, especially with GN where it's just a simple replacement of Generating: with [GN]. Honestly, how many people do you think will be messing with the parser? It's less than 5. We've run out of ISAs at this point. The only ISAs that come to mind at the moment are PARISC and IA64. One is dead and the other might as well be. A few things come to mind. 1) I think slightly more verbose names are OK and probably good. We've cut down significantly on the verbosity already, so we can add some back. 2) One thing that needs to be thought about is SOURCE vs TARGET. It seems that we should always use one or the other, no? My guess is that we should always use $TARGET. (Should we use both?) 3) If we choose $SOURCE, should it be from the actual source directory (i.e. not the BUILDDIR copy), or not? 4) I think we should strip BUILDDIR from the output (which for many people is just build/, but for me is much longer). Stripping build/ adds room for #2. I sent Ali code for this. (And I just realized that there is better code so talk to me) Nate ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev Here are my renaming suggestions. The first alternative is if we restrict tags to 7 characters which seems to be what Linux was doing judging by the spacing in the commands from the Makefile. The second alternative is if we go with arbitrarily long but reasonable tags. The right answer might be somewhere between the two alternatives. If what I've got here sucks and you have a better idea, please suggest it. C - CC - CC CC - CXX - CXX AS - AS - AS SW - SWIG - SWIG AR - AR - AR LN - LD - LD RN - RANLIB - RANLIB M4 - M4 - M4 GN - HEADER - SWITCH_HDR IA - THE_ISA - THE_ISA DF - DEFINES - DEFINES_PY IF - INFO_PY - INFO_PY SM - C_PARAM - SIMOBJ_PARAM SG - S_PARAM - SWIG_PARAM ES - C_ENUM - ENUM_STRS EW - S_ENUM - ENUM_PARAM PM - B_PARAM - PARAMHow specifically is this different from SG? SW - SWIG - SWIG TF - TRACE - TRACE_FLAGS EP - P_EMBED - EMBED_PY Gabe ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-09 18:57:06.214125) Review request for Default. Changes --- All of the output is now pretty with the exception of building libelf and gzstream. I can't seem to make those work. Summary --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs (updated) - SConstruct f4362ffd810f src/SConscript f4362ffd810f src/arch/isa_parser.py f4362ffd810f src/cpu/SConscript f4362ffd810f Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-09 18:59:43.725629) Review request for Default. Changes --- Try again, this time with the correct diff Summary --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs (updated) - SConstruct f4362ffd810f src/SConscript f4362ffd810f src/arch/isa_parser.py f4362ffd810f src/cpu/SConscript f4362ffd810f Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/#review471 --- Generally I'm in favor of this, but I think two characters are too few, and the abbreviations are almost arbitrary in some places. It's great to be brief and remove clutter but it's bad to be cryptic. I'd be in favor of short but meaningful tags like [PARAMS] or [ISA] or even [SWITCH HEADER]. src/arch/isa_parser.py http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/#comment693 We might not want to do this. It could be confusing whether those messages are coming from scons or the parser. - Gabe On 2010-11-09 18:59:43, Ali Saidi wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-09 18:59:43) Review request for Default. Summary --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f4362ffd810f src/SConscript f4362ffd810f src/arch/isa_parser.py f4362ffd810f src/cpu/SConscript f4362ffd810f Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/#review472 --- Love it. One thing I'd like to see would be to strip BUILD_DIR from the file name when printing. I can do that in a separate changeset though if you prefer. SConstruct http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/#comment694 I think that you should do this one the same way that you do the others with the getOutput function src/SConscript http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/#comment695 perhaps it would be better to have a MakeAction() function that buries the *getOutput code inside and just does something like: def MakeAction(func, string): if env['VERBOSE']: return Action(func) else: return Action(func, string) - Nathan On 2010-11-09 18:59:43, Ali Saidi wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-09 18:59:43) Review request for Default. Summary --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f4362ffd810f src/SConscript f4362ffd810f src/arch/isa_parser.py f4362ffd810f src/cpu/SConscript f4362ffd810f Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
On Nov 9, 2010, at 9:14 PM, Nathan Binkert wrote: This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ Love it. One thing I'd like to see would be to strip BUILD_DIR from the file name when printing. I can do that in a separate changeset though if you prefer. Since SCons is doing the $TARGET substitution, I'm not sure how I make this happen. SConstruct (Diff revision 3) 792 return Generating switch header + str(target[0]) 803 return [GN] + str(target[0]) I think that you should do this one the same way that you do the others with the getOutput function If you look at this all I'm doing is s/ Generating switch header/[GN]/g the verbosity of this hasn't really changed any. src/SConscript (Diff revision 3) 304 Action(makeTheISA, *getOutput( [IA] $TARGET))) perhaps it would be better to have a MakeAction() function that buries the *getOutput code inside and just does something like: def MakeAction(func, string): if env['VERBOSE']: return Action(func) else: return Action(func, string) Maybe, but I'm 99% sure that that will change the signature of the build so verbose and non-verbose will rebuild everything. Ali - Nathan On November 9th, 2010, 6:59 p.m., Ali Saidi wrote: Review request for Default. By Ali Saidi. Updated 2010-11-09 18:59:43 Description Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs SConstruct (f4362ffd810f) src/SConscript (f4362ffd810f) src/arch/isa_parser.py (f4362ffd810f) src/cpu/SConscript (f4362ffd810f) View Diff ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Since SCons is doing the $TARGET substitution, I'm not sure how I make this happen. You'd have to use a function instead of a string. It's pretty easy: def string(target, sources, env): return [XX] %s % (str(target[0])[build_dir_offset:], ) If you look at this all I'm doing is s/ Generating switch header/[GN]/g the verbosity of this hasn't really changed any. I personally am not worried about the verbosity. I think that the code should look the same as what you're doing with the other stuff. perhaps it would be better to have a MakeAction() function that buries the *getOutput code inside and just does something like: def MakeAction(func, string): if env['VERBOSE']: return Action(func) else: return Action(func, string) Maybe, but I'm 99% sure that that will change the signature of the build so verbose and non-verbose will rebuild everything. Ok, then make MakeAction look like this: def MakeAction(func, string): return Action(func, *getOutput(string)) I'd be very, very surprised if they're any different though. Nate ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
On Nov 9, 2010, at 9:24 PM, Gabriel Michael Black wrote: src/arch/isa_parser.pyhttp://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff/3/?file=5110#file5110line1948 (Diff revision 3) def update_if_needed(self, file, contents): 1948 print 'Generating', file 1948 print ' [GN]', file We might not want to do this. It could be confusing whether those messages are coming from scons or the parser. Why is that? Nate It could be confusing whether those messages are coming from scons or the parser. If something blows up and I need to find why, I would be very annoyed if I dug around in scons for a while only to discover that the very scons like tags were actually coming from the parser. Granted in a literal sense I'm not likely to be confused because we're having this conversation and I'd probably remember, but still [GN] isn't particularly memorable or mnemonic. I suppose alternatively we could use indentation. We could have one tag for running the parser at all, and then the tags the parser outputs would be indented a few extra spaces. That would be a good visual clue what's going on. Feel free to propose some more verbose names, but the whole idea is to remove the verbosity. Almost everything but [CC] and [SW] else gets executed once per build. If there is an error it's going to be pretty obvious where it came from, especially with GN where it's just a simple replacement of Generating: with [GN]. Honestly, how many people do you think will be messing with the parser? It's less than 5. We've run out of ISAs at this point. The only ISAs that come to mind at the moment are PARISC and IA64. One is dead and the other might as well be. Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-08 15:49:05.987230) Review request for Default. Summary (updated) --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f61e079ad05e Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
I've done this before, just a sec... (some googling) I think you have to use an Action object instead of a raw command in the Command builder. When building the Action object, the second parameter is the alternative text to output. It might look like the following: env.Command(target, source, Action(foo $TARGET $SOURCES, FOOING $SOURCES)) The []s are probably not necessary, but that's just my opinion. It might be better to support a -v or --verbose option on the scons command line if we can. An environment variable is a little obscure, and it's likely you'll just want verbose output temporarily, not as a long term environment setting. I don't really remember whether adding command line options to the scons command line is feasible and/or advisable, so I'll defer to other people's opinions, but it seems a little more natural to me. Gabe Quoting Ali Saidi sa...@umich.edu: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-08 15:49:05.987230) Review request for Default. Summary (updated) --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f61e079ad05e Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Oh wait, that's not an environment variable, that's a scons variable from the command line. My opinion still stands since it'd be sticky and it's not as nice as a -- option, but it's better than an environment variable. Gabe Quoting Gabriel Michael Black gbl...@eecs.umich.edu: I've done this before, just a sec... (some googling) I think you have to use an Action object instead of a raw command in the Command builder. When building the Action object, the second parameter is the alternative text to output. It might look like the following: env.Command(target, source, Action(foo $TARGET $SOURCES, FOOING $SOURCES)) The []s are probably not necessary, but that's just my opinion. It might be better to support a -v or --verbose option on the scons command line if we can. An environment variable is a little obscure, and it's likely you'll just want verbose output temporarily, not as a long term environment setting. I don't really remember whether adding command line options to the scons command line is feasible and/or advisable, so I'll defer to other people's opinions, but it seems a little more natural to me. Gabe Quoting Ali Saidi sa...@umich.edu: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-08 15:49:05.987230) Review request for Default. Summary (updated) --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f61e079ad05e Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
I think you have to use an Action object instead of a raw command in the Command builder. When building the Action object, the second parameter is the alternative text to output. It might look like the following: env.Command(target, source, Action(foo $TARGET $SOURCES, FOOING $SOURCES)) The []s are probably not necessary, but that's just my opinion. If it's not too much work, it would be really nice to do this. It might be better to support a -v or --verbose option on the scons command line if we can. An environment variable is a little obscure, and it's likely you'll just want verbose output temporarily, not as a long term environment setting. I don't really remember whether adding command line options to the scons command line is feasible and/or advisable, so I'll defer to other people's opinions, but it seems a little more natural to me. You can add a command line variable. I think that a verbose variable would be nice though -v is already taken (we can repurpose it). Nate ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Love it. What I'd really like would be to have the shorthand go to stdout and have the verbose stuff go to some sort of scons.log in case I want the command line. That is probably too much work. We could also go the other way and add a -q/--quiet (though quiet already means something quieter than we have). Nate ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
It's not sticky since it's not added to the sticky_vars below. Although it seems like our options are a bit adhoc and there is an arguments() class in scons that does some of this for us. RE your action command below, yes I saw that you can do it with an Action() however, according to the mailing list it's broken in SCons 2.0 or late 1.X so I'm not too excited about doing it. If we really wanted to we could detect the version and not do it in those cases, but that might be too much work. Ali On Nov 8, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Gabriel Michael Black wrote: Oh wait, that's not an environment variable, that's a scons variable from the command line. My opinion still stands since it'd be sticky and it's not as nice as a -- option, but it's better than an environment variable. Gabe Quoting Gabriel Michael Black gbl...@eecs.umich.edu: I've done this before, just a sec... (some googling) I think you have to use an Action object instead of a raw command in the Command builder. When building the Action object, the second parameter is the alternative text to output. It might look like the following: env.Command(target, source, Action(foo $TARGET $SOURCES, FOOING $SOURCES)) The []s are probably not necessary, but that's just my opinion. It might be better to support a -v or --verbose option on the scons command line if we can. An environment variable is a little obscure, and it's likely you'll just want verbose output temporarily, not as a long term environment setting. I don't really remember whether adding command line options to the scons command line is feasible and/or advisable, so I'll defer to other people's opinions, but it seems a little more natural to me. Gabe Quoting Ali Saidi sa...@umich.edu: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-08 15:49:05.987230) Review request for Default. Summary (updated) --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f61e079ad05e Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Check out scons -Q Ali On Nov 8, 2010, at 8:11 PM, Nathan Binkert wrote: Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Love it. What I'd really like would be to have the shorthand go to stdout and have the verbose stuff go to some sort of scons.log in case I want the command line. That is probably too much work. We could also go the other way and add a -q/--quiet (though quiet already means something quieter than we have). Nate ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier.
Hmm. ok.. it seems like the issue only exists for builders. Which means we can do it although I don't know a way to make the non COMSTR ones produce output when VERBOSE=True. Thoughts? Ali pretty_scons.patch Description: Binary data On Nov 8, 2010, at 10:29 PM, Ali Saidi wrote: It's not sticky since it's not added to the sticky_vars below. Although it seems like our options are a bit adhoc and there is an arguments() class in scons that does some of this for us. RE your action command below, yes I saw that you can do it with an Action() however, according to the mailing list it's broken in SCons 2.0 or late 1.X so I'm not too excited about doing it. If we really wanted to we could detect the version and not do it in those cases, but that might be too much work. Ali On Nov 8, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Gabriel Michael Black wrote: Oh wait, that's not an environment variable, that's a scons variable from the command line. My opinion still stands since it'd be sticky and it's not as nice as a -- option, but it's better than an environment variable. Gabe Quoting Gabriel Michael Black gbl...@eecs.umich.edu: I've done this before, just a sec... (some googling) I think you have to use an Action object instead of a raw command in the Command builder. When building the Action object, the second parameter is the alternative text to output. It might look like the following: env.Command(target, source, Action(foo $TARGET $SOURCES, FOOING $SOURCES)) The []s are probably not necessary, but that's just my opinion. It might be better to support a -v or --verbose option on the scons command line if we can. An environment variable is a little obscure, and it's likely you'll just want verbose output temporarily, not as a long term environment setting. I don't really remember whether adding command line options to the scons command line is feasible and/or advisable, so I'll defer to other people's opinions, but it seems a little more natural to me. Gabe Quoting Ali Saidi sa...@umich.edu: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/ --- (Updated 2010-11-08 15:49:05.987230) Review request for Default. Summary (updated) --- Scons: Try to make SCons output prettier. This change has scons print [ C], [CC], [LN], etc in front of normal commands instead of the entire command themselves and cleans up the build a good bit. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a way to get the same behavior from env.Command() calls so they're still verbose. Thoughts? Like it? Hate it? Diffs - SConstruct f61e079ad05e Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/299/diff Testing --- Thanks, Ali ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev ___ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
