[Buildroot] [PATCH RFC] core: enable per-package log files

[Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>]

On 17-10-17 17:45, Anisse Astier wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 02:01:41PM +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 17-10-17 09:11, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
[snip]
>>  I don't see any way that it could break things, actually. But obviously it
>> *does* need to be tested more extensively.
> 
> Indeed it does. I found another issue in the parsing, it turns out there
> might be many tabs at the beginning of a recipe, so they must be
> consumed greedily as well:
> 
> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ for arg in args:
>              elif line[0] == '+':  # ignore
>                  dprint("jobserver MAKEFLAGS mode")
>                  line = line[1:]
> +            elif line[0] == '\t':  # eat additionnal tabs
> +                dprint("more tabs")
> +                line = line[1:]

 That's not entirely correct either, because any other make character followed
by tab means the tab is part of the command. Better do line.lstrip('\t').

>              else:  # no more matching initial recipe character
>                  break
>          if print_command:
> 
>>
>>>>
>>>> Not many. I have only tested the qemu_aarch64_virt_defconfig which does
>>>> not contain much(~28 packages), but I was already able to fix a few
>>>> parsing issues.
>>>
>>> A bigger test is indeed needed to validate things. But let's see what
>>> others have to say first.
>>
>>  Indeed, because I'm not in favour...
>>
>> - IMO 'make --output-sync=recurse' is sufficient to begin with.

 Anisse, what's your POV about this? Do you see reasons why output-sync is
insufficient?

>>
>> - This script requires python3 for *any* build, but python3 is not currently a
>> dependency.
>>
>> - If the script is changed so it supports both 2 and 3, it still requires a
>> python invocation for every build step, which is slowing things down.
>>
>> - Even if it is converted to a shell script or sped up in a different way, it
>> will make things more complicated for IMO limited gain.
> 
> I'm not sure it can be converted to pure shell because of the lexing issues
> (nested double quotes, etc.).

 Something like this?

IFS="$(echo)"
for line in $2; do
	sh -c "$line" 2>&1 | $1
done

 Hm, stripping the first characters of $line is still to do...


> But this can still be optimized as well. Either by using a native program, by
> having a long running process that would receive commands through a pipe, or
> even by using a GNU make loadable module.

 A GNU make loadable module, I never heard of that. Is that really an option?
That could really be useful, also for other things.


 Regards,
 Arnout


[snip]

-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF