From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1K8hkY-0005xi-TN for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:55 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K8hkW-0005vW-3M for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:52 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K8hkU-0005sR-0R for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:50 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33206 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K8hkS-0005rx-PA for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:49 -0400 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:50552) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K8hkR-0003AW-Hv for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:47 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 17 Jun 2008 16:25:45 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.21] (static-72-92-88-10.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [72.92.88.10]) by relay.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56E2619058 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: <20080617130708.493de46a@gibibit.com> References: <20080617104448.2b43f109@gibibit.com> <1213732667.31285.19.camel@dv> <20080617130708.493de46a@gibibit.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:44 -0400 Message-Id: <1213734344.32234.2.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.2 (2.22.2-2.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tidy up 'make' output X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:25:53 -0000 On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 13:07 -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:57:47 -0400 > Pavel Roskin wrote: > > > On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 10:44 -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote: > > > When thousands of long, wrapped lines full of command line options > > > and file names are scrolling by on your terminal, it is very hard > > > to pick out the irregularities in the build process, such as error > > > and warnings. > > > > I like the idea, but the massive use of "override" doesn't looks > > right. I'd rather see variables with different names used throughout > > the makefiles. Linux makefiles don't use "override" at all. > > "override" should be the last resort if everything else fails. > > Ok. Well, are implicit make rules ever used in the makefiles? I don't think so. "make -r" is working fine for me. > If so, > we would have to make them explicit in order to use a different > compiler variable. I tried to touch the least number of things > possible with my patch. That's a good idea, but doing things right should take priority. If you want, you can split your work along different lines - silence CC first, then LD and so on. > If you wish, I can take a crack at eliminating the use of 'override' > and using a different set of make variables for the instrumented calls > to commands. That would be great. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin