Re: [jamboost] Re: Upcoming changes in default bjam output

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-10 01:23:32

On Saturday 08 October 2005 00:43, David Abrahams wrote:

> >>
> >>I think we may need some small extension to allow the suppression of
> >>the executed commands for cases like the "run" rule that's used in
> >>testing: it's so ugly as to be unhelpful.
> >>
> >>If I don't hear loud objections in the next 24 hours, I'm going to
> >>implement this change and check it in.
> >
> > I am sad to hear that. Not outputting the commands executed is one of
> > the things I most appreciate about BB.

Seconded. Say, when building KDE programs the amount of "/usr/bin/libtool 
bla-bla-bla" lines is much larger then amount of anything reasonable. It's 
next to impossible to find warning messages if building from console.

> I'm only talking about the default.
>
> > Always when I see the output that is generated by compilation of a
> > project that uses the autotools makes want run away and scream in
> > horror. 5 to 15 lines of output (especially when using gettext) for
> > each file compiled that scrolls by so fast and so unexpectedly
> > causes that it takes me an awful lot of time just to figure out the
> > name of the file being compiled. If the command works, I do not
> > really care about all the options. I just want to know what is
> > happening (compiling, linking... name of the files involved etc).
> >
> > Can we have at least an option (command line or rule to put in Jamroot)
> > to retain the current style of output? Thanks.
>
> It's already there, and it wouldn't go away.

Where? Command line is not quite good, we need Jamroot setting.

- Volodya

-- 
Vladimir Prus
http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com
Boost.Build V2: http://boost.org/boost-build2