On 17 July 2017 at 11:26, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:06:12AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: >> The current 'quiet' mode is not quite aimed at the same purpose: >> it's good for interactive use where you don't want the long detail >> of command lines but you do want some periodic indication of >> progress through the compile. For entirely noninteractive >> setups like travis and patchew there's no need to produce >> what is in effect a rather verbose progress bar... > > For unattended automated systems though, I think running with V=1 is > preferrable to quiet mode. When you don't have direct access to the > test system to reproduce systems, every bit of information that you > can get from the logs is potentially useful, including full compiler > args. The flipside is that in other cases the verbose output can > obscure the error messages you are after - depends what your're trying > to debug - code problems vs build system problems.
The problem in both cases is that it makes the logs nearly unusable. For travis, their log-pretty-printer takes forever to try to render our enormously long build logs, to the point where you're better off grabbing the raw text-only log. For patchew, I basically ignore patchew compile failure emails because it is too painful to get to the bottom of the email where the actual error message is because of the pages and pages and pages of useless progress output :-( thanks -- PMM
