On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 04:34:57PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
> >I'm afraid I'm with Reinhold. As a *programmer*, I consider it very bad
> >practice to ignore warnings. For the system to hide them from me, well !!!
>
>
> They're not being ignored. They're not even being seen. Please address my
> point of how you would see them in 37,000 lines of console output.
Many people are building *any* large projects with something like
make 2>&1 | tee m.log
and then look at m.log after the build. I do so, and I do so by
default. When building distribution packages for OpenBSD, I also
log the complete output of extracting, patching, configuring,
building and installing and look at that log file. I won't look at
any project specific logfiles.
Important stuff *has* to go to stdout or stderr. If every project
would invent its own way to hide important messages from stdout/stderr
*by default* and put them into project specific logfiles, it would
a hell for everyone who's porting those project to specific operating
system distributions.
I don't want to have to look *where* too look for warnings and
errors.
However, the normal build output won't be touched, as Graham wrote.
It's only about the doc output for now, if I understood Graham
correctly.
Ciao,
Kili
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
