| 1 |
On Sunday 04 December 2011 22:42:46 Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12/05/11 10:49, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> And spend much more time trying to find them silly logfiles now that we |
| 5 |
> >> hide the output. I really enjoy having to fix yet another bad default |
| 6 |
> >> everywhere just so I see *why* things fail ... |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Unless something has changed the logfile name including full path is |
| 9 |
> > printed when there is an error. So, it is just a matter of copy/paste |
| 10 |
> > into a cat and you can watch the whole thing scroll by and even |
| 11 |
> > pretend it is compiling really fast while it is doing it. :) |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> So one useless step added, which might give extra funny output because |
| 14 |
> of escaped escape sequences and such funnies, with no benefit for me |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
uhh, no. cat on the log files works perfectly fine in any sane terminal. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> > It seems like a pretty sane default to assume that most packaged build |
| 19 |
> > without issues - after all, that is basically the goal, right? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> And for those I don't care about the output at all, but when things fail |
| 22 |
> I want to see it. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
it's hard to have a conversation when you don't even verify your statements. |
| 25 |
when a build fails, it outputs the entire log. thus your statement here makes |
| 26 |
no sense at all. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> So for me the proper default is "show everything, let me ignore what I |
| 29 |
> don't want" |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
then change your defaults |
| 32 |
-mike |
Archives