From: Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] Makefile: Remove KBUILD_VERBOSE and quiet
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 16:14:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55F2E1E1.8090701@mind.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <003996441bb228c23d8e79202370f8d1@openmailbox.org>
On 11-09-15 09:52, C?dric Marie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just realized that this patch is breaking linux and busybox verbose mode.
>
> Exporting KBUILD_VERBOSE makes it available for linux and busybox makefile. This
> makefile sets KBUILD_VERBOSE if V is set in the command line, but it also uses
> KBUILD_VERBOSE if exported by the shell.
>
> In fact it seems that the original idea was to export all variables that could
> be understood by different build systems:
> - KBUILD_VERBOSE for linux and busybox
> - VERBOSE for CMake packages.
>
> So, if we still want to handle verbosity in infrastructures (and some packages
> that use generic infrastructure) - and I think we should:
> I think the right way to forward verbose mode to linux and busybox is to add V=1
> in linux.mk and busybox.mk.
I'm not so sure of that. The KBUILD_VERBOSE approach worked well, there wasn't
really a problem with it. The problem was with VERBOSE, which is interpreted
differently by cmake. Removing KBUILD_VERBOSE and quiet was just because
(quoting your commit message): "KBUILD_VERBOSE and quiet variables are set and
exported, but they are not used. We can safely remove them."
The current way (exporting KBUILD_VERBOSE) is in fact quite elegant: it's just
a couple of lines of code, and it works for any package based on Kbuild. Like
uClibc, barebox, who knows, maybe they also use KBUILD_VERBOSE? This way is much
easier than handling it for every package separately.
So I think the approach should be:
- remove quiet
- add an explanation about why KBUILD_VERBOSE is useful
- use VERBOSE but in a different way.
and in fact, since we already have KBUILD_VERBOSE, maybe VERBOSE can just be
dropped? (internally, it's still used for cmake.)
>
> As a consequence, I believe it is not possible to split my patch into different
> steps.
> The patch must:
> - remove quiet
> - remove KBUILD_VERBOSE
> - use VERBOSE but in a different way (not exported), as already described
> - handle VERBOSE in pkg-cmake.mk, pkg-autotools.mk, linux.mk, busybox.mk, and
> qt.mk (this one is possibly already correct).
>
> If you agree, I will provide a single patch that will cancel the two previous
> ones (I will add patch version and log this time).
The reason for splitting was that the first one would be uncontroversial - but
it clearly isn't, so I'm OK with keeping them merged.
Thanks for keeping this up!
Regards,
Arnout
>
> Regards,
>
--
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout dot vandecappelle at essensium dot com
Senior Embedded Software Architect . . . . . . +32-478-010353 (mobile)
Essensium, Mind division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-11 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-07 20:47 [Buildroot] [PATCH] Makefile: Remove KBUILD_VERBOSE and quiet Cédric Marie
2015-09-07 21:14 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2015-09-08 12:14 ` Cédric Marie
2015-09-08 12:30 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2015-09-08 13:01 ` Cédric Marie
2015-09-08 13:34 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2015-09-11 7:52 ` Cédric Marie
2015-09-11 14:14 ` Arnout Vandecappelle [this message]
2015-09-20 13:11 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-09-20 20:43 ` Cédric Marie
2015-09-20 21:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-09-20 21:26 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2015-09-21 10:23 ` Cédric Marie
2015-09-21 17:11 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2015-10-02 15:52 ` Cédric Marie
2015-10-03 11:57 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55F2E1E1.8090701@mind.be \
--to=arnout@mind.be \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox