Hi, I have no decision making abilities so this comment is just an observation
I think that being able to wrap make output in strings such as codes to set/unset colours or tags so that a parser can distinguish it would be quite interesting. My personal preference would be to see things the other way around - i.e. colourising/tagging program output rather than make output. Whatever people decide to do, I'm interested in being able to parse the output of make when it's so long that you can't really look at it all with your eyes because it would take you a week. i.e. you need software that can summarise and extract interesting information from a huge quantity of output. Regards, Tim On 3 October 2011 17:22, Sebastian Pipping <sebast...@pipping.org> wrote: > Hello again, > > > > it would be great to have some feedback on this - anyone? > > > To re-summarize: > > - make does not color its output itself as of now > > - colorized output would help distincing output by make > from output by programs involked by make, example at [1] > > - existing wrappers (like colormake [2]) have problems > > - There is a quickhack patch against make 3.82 at [3] > > - I am willing to keep working on that patch > until you like it enough to apply it upstream > > - I don't know about your expectations on such a patch > yet, but I need to know. > > Please get back to me on this. Thanks! > > > > Sebastian Pipping > > >> [1] http://hartwork.org/public/make-with-color.png >> [2] http://bre.klaki.net/programs/colormake/ >> [3] http://hartwork.org/public/make-3.82-color-v1.patch > > _______________________________________________ > Bug-make mailing list > Bug-make@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make > -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/friends/ _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
