Hi, On 14/06/13 13:35, Matthias Klose wrote: > Much more often than I do like it, I see bug reports for the toolchain just > pointing to a build log. Then looking at the build log, you often just see > > CC ... > CCLD ... (sometimes even colorized) > > This doesn't really help when trying to diagnose things, and even for > successful > builds it's valuable to have the complete build log, including the parts how > the > upstream build system is called from the Debian packaging. > > Verbose build logs allow to analyse package builds and give hints to more > issues > regarding the build, especially for the hardening flags. The lintian > hardening > checks are incomplete, because they rely on the inspection of the generated > binaries, which may be incomplete especially for many plugins or dynamically > loadable extensions. > > So I'm proposing for jessie: > > - File and track issues for packages not enabling verbose builds. > https://buildd.debian.org/~brlink/bytag/W-compiler-flags-hidden.html > > - Fix debhelper not passing --disable-silent-rules by default. > #680686 > I think cdbs already does this.
It has done so since version 0.4.62 from 2009. > - Fix debhelper to show how the upstream build system is called. > #680687 > As an alternative buildds could run with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=verbose > > - Change Debian policy to recommend or require verbose build logs. > #628515 Completely agreed on everything. I thought this was already a requirement. > This is not rocket science, but allows for almost free additional QA. Size of > the build logs shouldn't be an issue, but if it is, I'm considering to disable > compiler warning and errors messages by default, unless > DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=verbose is set. If size is an issue, xz-compression could probably help a lot. Cheers, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51bb0535.1080...@debian.org
