Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 16:38:09 +1000 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r396248 - head/games/scummvm Message-ID: <55EE8251.8020400@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20150908063644.GA58868@FreeBSD.org> References: <201509070625.t876PBJV079503@repo.freebsd.org> <663DB8E120502884DE748209@atuin.in.mat.cc> <20150907070846.GA23292@FreeBSD.org> <55EE412F.4080802@FreeBSD.org> <20150908063644.GA58868@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/09/2015 4:36 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 12:00:15PM +1000, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
>> I advocate verbose by default across the board in the ports I maintain
>> already. Our defaults should be conducive to debug-ability, particularly
>> for the case of users providing feedback for maintainers.
>>
>> How about we exp-run for GNU_CONFIGURE=yes ports:
>>
>> CONFIGURE_ARGS+= --disable-silent-rules
>> MAKE_ENV+= V=1 (maybe even MAKE_ARGS)
>
> One problem here is that lots of ports have configure scripts generated
> before silent rules idea existed (and thus have no --disable-silent-rules
> switch). However, I agree that such an exp-run is useful: we can see the
> old/new configure scripts distribution.
>
> After all, we can always grep ${CONFIGURE_SCRIPT} for see if they support
> some kind of build verbosity support and amend CONFIGURE_ARGS accordingly.
>
> ./danfe
>
Mmmm, would those ports also be missing the automake bits for V=1 ?
--
koobs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55EE8251.8020400>