> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 22:03:39 -0400
>
> Now that we seem to have a workable solution for output synchronization
> for both POSIX and Windows systems, I wonder if we shouldn't consider
> enabling it as the default mode when parallel builds are running.
Now that we seem to have a workable solution for output synchronization
for both POSIX and Windows systems, I wonder if we shouldn't consider
enabling it as the default mode when parallel builds are running.
I understand that this will be a change that could be visible (beyond
the collection of ou
On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 22:36 +0200, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> % make -Omake # same with -Otarget
> m:2: recipe for target 'foo' failed
> make: *** [foo] Error 1
> foo:error
>
> This seems at least strange to me: The conclusion "recipe failed" is
> printed before the reason (the messages from the jo
On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 20:00 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > I've pushed a change to add a new argument to the -O/--output-sync
> > option, "job", to write output after each line of the recipe.
>
> What is its purpose? To avoid mixing in the same screen line
> characters from several parallel sub-
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 16:01:05 -0400
>
> I guess I thought you were writing a batch file,
> then invoking the shell with the batch file name as the command to run.
> E.g., "command.com " vs. "perl " etc. I am naive
> but it seems like that should work
On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 22:41 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > I think the implementation you have is not quite right. I think the
> > parsing of the @-+ stuff is common across all platforms if we have a
> > shell, so you don't need the "else /* non-posix shell */".
>
> I do need a separate code, be
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:15:09 -0400
>
> The goal of this code in the if-statement is to implement a special case
> allowing ONESHELL to be easier to add in the case where you DO have a
> standard shell. In that case, and ONLY in that case, we remove
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 14:37:29 -0400
>
> On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 20:19 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > From: Paul Smith
> > > Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> > > Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:58:54 -0400
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 23:00 +0300, Eli Zaretski
On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 21:14 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Paul Smith
> > Cc: make-...@gnu.org, bug-make@gnu.org
> > Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 12:54:10 -0400
> >
> > On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 19:17 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > The .ONESHELL feature is now supported on MS-Windows, for the def
On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 20:19 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Paul Smith
> > Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> > Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:58:54 -0400
> >
> > On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 23:00 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > That would be nice, indeed.
> >
> > OK, pushed.
>
> Thanks! But I see you kept g
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: make-...@gnu.org, bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 12:54:10 -0400
>
> On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 19:17 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > The .ONESHELL feature is now supported on MS-Windows, for the default
> > Windows shell (cmd.exe) or compatible replacements, in the
Update of bug #37065 (project make):
Status:None => Fixed
Open/Closed:Open => Closed
Fixed Release:None => SCM
Triage Status:
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:58:54 -0400
>
> On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 23:00 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > That would be nice, indeed.
>
> OK, pushed.
Thanks! But I see you kept global_dl and the call to dlopen with the
1st argument NULL. What is the pur
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 10:22:40 -0400
> From: David Boyce
> Cc: Frank Heckenbach , Eli Zaretskii ,
> bug-make
>
> So I'd argue for:
>
> -O line (new)
> -O job (current -O target)
> -O make
Agree about "line" (assuming I understood what it means), but disagree
about renaming "target": it is
> From: Paul Smith
> Cc: e...@gnu.org, david.s.bo...@gmail.com, bug-make@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:34:44 -0400
>
> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 22:36 +0200, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> > > > This is useful (to me) because at any time, I know what's running.
> > > > ("[Start]" messages minus "[En
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
> I'm not excited about that term ("job"); it's kind of accurate, but in
> the documentation for example we're really mushy about exactly what a
> "job" is, vs. a "recipe" or a "command line" etc. I'd like to pick some
> terms for this, define th
16 matches
Mail list logo
