> From: Paul Smith <psm...@gnu.org> > Cc: br...@clisp.org, bug-make@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2023 09:16:59 -0400 > > On Sun, 2023-08-27 at 08:51 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > This checklist is very useful, but to make it even more useful, it > > lacks two things: > > > > . an example of error message that indicates each kind of problem > > . a cross-reference to where the details are > > There is a menu of links to each type of error just below the list, > because this is a chapter node in texinfo; like:
Yes, I know. But a single @xref after each item in the "checklist" will be a great help, IMO. > > I would suggest to add here a short description of how to interpret > > these exit codes. The codes 2 and -1 are very frequent, so maybe > > explain them right here. > > What should we explain about them? That error code 2 means file not found, and -1 means a command was not found or completely failed to run. It is easy to show a couple of examples for each one, we see those every day. > > Removing @ is not always enough. Many makefiles nowadays need you to > > say "make V=1" to override the default verbosity level. I suggest to > > mention that. > > What does "V=1" do, that removing the "@" doesn't do? It shows the full command instead of something like CC foo.o > I'm not familiar with any makefile where "V=1" enables "extra" > debugging: normally it just disables "@". I would prefer to avoid > adding descriptions that depend on how specific makefiles are > implemented, unless that is also described in the GNU Make manual. The V=1 stuff is nowadays standard in the GNU project's makefiles, so I think it would be a good addition. Of course, it's your call.
