Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 07:17:36 -0400 From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com> To: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: .warning directives in Makefile Message-ID: <200806270717.37326@aldan> In-Reply-To: <486496A7.1000402@FreeBSD.org> References: <4863C0D2.1020804@FreeBSD.org> <4863C80E.2010309@aldan.algebra.com> <486496A7.1000402@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On =D0'=D1=D4=CE=C9=C3=D1 27 =DE=C5=D2=D7=C5=CE=D8 2008, Sergey Matveychuk = wrote: =3D Mikhail Teterin wrote: =3D >=20 =3D >> But I'd like remind .warning directive pollutes stderr =3D > Warnings are NOT pollution... =3D >> and discouraged portupgrade which was designed to catch messages fro= m=20 =3D >> stderr and rises errors. =3D > I'd say, the portupgrade needs fixing, if it does, indeed, choke on=20 =3D=20 =3D Well, only imagemagic and ghostscript* use .warning. It is NOT a common= =20 =3D way to print warnings. Some criteria! FreeBSD is not a common way to keep computers running either= =2E.. =3D Why do you think portupgrade needs fixing? I already said, why -- there is nothing wrong with using stderr to warn. Al= l=20 compilers do that, for one example -- that's /exactly/ what stderr is for:= =20 diagnostic information. Try redirecting cc's stdout to /dev/null -- you'll= =20 still see the warnings (unless you also redirect stderr). If foo chokes on that, you should be contacting foo's maintainer, but that'= s=20 not me (nor do I maintain imagemagic or ghostscript, BTW). In case of=20 portupgrade, the foo is not even part of FreeBSD -- I don't understand, why= =20 you think, you can demand patches from me... Yours, -mi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200806270717.37326>