El lun, 02-04-2012 a las 15:34 -0700, Zac Medico escribió:
> On 04/02/2012 03:24 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > How all this ended up? It would still be nice to have verbose output
> > enabled by default (even people being able to use emerge --quiet to
> > silent it) to check for undesired flags (like
On 04/02/2012 03:24 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> How all this ended up? It would still be nice to have verbose output
> enabled by default (even people being able to use emerge --quiet to
> silent it) to check for undesired flags (like -Werror,
> -DG_DISABLE_DEPRECATED...) easily :)
We've got a featur
El sáb, 05-11-2011 a las 21:03 -0600, Ryan Hill escribió:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 21:00:32 +0100
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
>
> > > I've seen too many bugs reports today that gave me cute, colorful
> > > build.logs and almost no information about underlaying bug...
> >
> > That's usually because use
On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 21:00:32 +0100
Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > I've seen too many bugs reports today that gave me cute, colorful
> > build.logs and almost no information about underlaying bug...
>
> That's usually because users sometimes attach only "relevant" parts of build
> log (well, relevan
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 09:58:00 +0100
Kacper Kowalik wrote:
> Hi,
> I'd like to ask that we enable verbose building by default. I have
> cmake-utils.eclass in mind, because it's dead easy there, but there's a
> lot of packages that support things like "make V=1" or "make VERBOSE=1" too.
>
> I've se
