Re: [boost] [Boost C++ Libraries] #3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file.
-----Original Message----- From: Boost C++ Libraries [mailto:noreply@lists.boost.org] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 8:44 PM Cc: boost-bugs@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost C++ Libraries] #3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file.
#3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file. --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: pbristow | Owner: Type: Bugs | Status: new Milestone: Boost 1.42.0 | Component: Building Boost Version: Boost 1.41.0 | Severity: Problem Keywords: simplified library build | --------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment(by vladimir_prus):
Would printing this information at the end of the build address your concerns?
Well yes it would, but surely it is always better to have a log file so you can check it went OK? Or will checking %errorlevel% tell the user that? But checking %errorlevel% doesn't tell you what libraries you have just built. (If you are using the simple 'default' build, you may not care?) Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow@hetp.u-net.com
Paul A. Bristow wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Boost C++ Libraries [mailto:noreply@lists.boost.org] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 8:44 PM Cc: boost-bugs@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost C++ Libraries] #3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file.
BTW, looks like replying to Trac emails does not actually get the comment added to Trac ticket.
#3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file. --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: pbristow | Owner: Type: Bugs | Status: new Milestone: Boost 1.42.0 | Component: Building Boost Version: Boost 1.41.0 | Severity: Problem Keywords: simplified library build | --------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment(by vladimir_prus):
Would printing this information at the end of the build address your concerns?
Well yes it would, but surely it is always better to have a log file so you can check it went OK?
Or will checking %errorlevel% tell the user that?
My plan is as follows: 1. Make 'stop of first error' the default behaviour, so if you get an error, you will surely notice. 2. If the build is successfull, print the summary of where what was installed. It *seems* that with such arrangement, you don't have to look at the log too often.
But checking %errorlevel% doesn't tell you what libraries you have just built.
Do you mean that the user wants to know what library have failed to build? I think with the above behaviour, he'll know. On the other hand, we already have a couple libraries that are built depending on configuration (python, mpi) and few others (math long long, wide serialization) that will become such. So, maybe printing the summary of what was built, and why not, could still be helpful (in addition to the current output telling where what is installed). What do you think? - Volodya
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Vladimir Prus Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 9:20 AM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost C++ Libraries] #3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file.
Paul A. Bristow wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Boost C++ Libraries [mailto:noreply@lists.boost.org] Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 8:44 PM Cc: boost-bugs@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost C++ Libraries] #3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file.
BTW, looks like replying to Trac emails does not actually get the comment added to Trac ticket.
#3644: Getting starting simplified build from source should use a log file.
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: pbristow | Owner: Type: Bugs | Status: new Milestone: Boost 1.42.0 | Component: Building Boost Version: Boost 1.41.0 | Severity: Problem Keywords: simplified library build |
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment(by vladimir_prus):
Would printing this information at the end of the build address your concerns?
Well yes it would, but surely it is always better to have a log file so you can check it went OK?
Or will checking %errorlevel% tell the user that?
My plan is as follows:
1. Make 'stop of first error' the default behaviour, so if you get an error, you will surely notice. 2. If the build is successfull, print the summary of where what was installed.
It *seems* that with such arrangement, you don't have to look at the log too often.
But checking %errorlevel% doesn't tell you what libraries you have just built.
Do you mean that the user wants to know what library have failed to build? I
think with the
above behaviour, he'll know.
On the other hand, we already have a couple libraries that are built depending on configuration (python, mpi) and few others (math long long, wide serialization) that will become such. So, maybe printing the summary of what was built, and why not, could still be helpful (in addition to the current output telling where what is installed).
What do you think?
Printing a summary *at the end* sounds fine to me - so doesn't scroll off the top! (Let's not take a "don't tell the poor dears too much in case they get confused" approach (as widely practised by a well-know operating system ;-) Paul PS I'm still of the view that providing several sample MS .bat files would be useful too. - Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow@hetp.u-net.com
participants (2)
-
Paul A. Bristow -
Vladimir Prus