Re: Slick build output

2005-01-31 Thread Jason But
Oops re:patch My system is a FreeBSD one so there are some other differences. Please ignore the bits of the patch that: === in programs/Makefile.in diff -urN wine-20050111/programs/Makefile.in wine-20050111.new/programs/Makefile.in --- wine-20050111/p

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-31 Thread Alexandre Julliard
ot > the open-source way. Feel free to start a project on sourceforge for that. It's clearly not Wine specific and doesn't belong in the Wine CVS. > Ok, this is a problem. Does this mean you won't accept any patches to > the makefiles to convert to "slick" buil

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-31 Thread Robert Shearman
em. and you avoid adding complexity (and non-portable code) into our makefiles. Ok, this is a problem. Does this mean you won't accept any patches to the makefiles to convert to "slick" build output? Rob

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-31 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Jason But <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > - I have been a developer for 20 years and nothing frustrates me more than > make output that is over complicated. I see the point of printing the full > command line when developing and debugging the Makefile and the make process. > > Once this is fix

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-30 Thread Jesse Allen
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:41:15 +1100, Jason But > > --- > jbut-laptop# make > Making in libs/ > Making in libs/port/ > Compiling ffs.c > Compiling fstatvfs.c > Compiling futimes.c >

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-30 Thread Jason But
First, I apologise for the patch not being here... It appears that my attachment failed, I include it inline in the mail this time.. To Make.rules.in --- 20a21,32 > # Default running of (gnu)make causes a silent make with th

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-29 Thread Mike Hearn
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 18:42:08 -0500, Vincent BÃron wrote: > It's not like there are 10 write_msft.c files in the Wine source No, but am I the only one who gets annoyed at how many thread.c files there are? I'm sure everyone can think of their pet example, but there are a lot of files in the Wine tr

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-29 Thread Marcus Meissner
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 06:03:20PM -0600, Robert Shearman wrote: > Vincent Béron wrote: > > >Le ven 28/01/2005 à 12:22, Robert Shearman a écrit : > >[snip] > > > > > >>write_msft.c:590: warning: 'ctl2_alloc_importinfo' defined but not used > >>write_msft.c:628: warning: 'ctl2_alloc_importfile' de

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Robert Shearman
Vincent Béron wrote: Le ven 28/01/2005 à 12:22, Robert Shearman a écrit : [snip] write_msft.c:590: warning: 'ctl2_alloc_importinfo' defined but not used write_msft.c:628: warning: 'ctl2_alloc_importfile' defined but not used write_msft.c:1048: warning: 'ctl2_find_nth_reference' defined but not u

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Vincent Béron
Le ven 28/01/2005 à 12:22, Robert Shearman a écrit : [snip] > write_msft.c:590: warning: 'ctl2_alloc_importinfo' defined but not used > write_msft.c:628: warning: 'ctl2_alloc_importfile' defined but not used > write_msft.c:1048: warning: 'ctl2_find_nth_reference' defined but not used > > It doesn'

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Steven Edwards
Hi Jason, --- Jason But <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This patch doesn't do the complete job, instead only produces output for the > compile (gcc) stages. In fact, (make install) will produce no output at all! > > If people think this is a good idea, simple extensions will lead to complete >

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Robert Shearman
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote: "Robert Shearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How many developers need to see the command line being passed to gcc? I would argue that it would be more useful if there was a short "[CC] regsvr.c" rather than the multi-line output there is now which makes warnings more d

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Dmitry Timoshkov
"Robert Shearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How many developers need to see the command line being passed to gcc? I > would argue that it would be more useful if there was a short "[CC] > regsvr.c" rather than the multi-line output there is now which makes > warnings more difficult to spot.

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Robert Shearman
Alexandre Julliard wrote: Jason But <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Not really related to the actual wine development but more to the make/build/install environment. Remembering the most wine users will not necessarily be developers we should consider improving the output of running (./configure

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Alexandre Julliard
Jason But <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Not really related to the actual wine development but more to the > make/build/install environment. > > Remembering the most wine users will not necessarily be developers we should > consider improving the output of running (./configure && make) to make i

Re: Slick build output

2005-01-28 Thread Robert Shearman
Jason But wrote: Hello all, Not really related to the actual wine development but more to the make/build/install environment. Remembering the most wine users will not necessarily be developers we should consider improving the output of running (./configure && make) to make it more user friendly

Slick build output

2005-01-27 Thread Jason But
Hello all, Not really related to the actual wine development but more to the make/build/install environment. Remembering the most wine users will not necessarily be developers we should consider improving the output of running (./configure && make) to make it more user friendly. Hopefully it