Re: [PATCH] Improve AM_SILENT_RULES coverage

[Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 10:23 -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
> On 10/06/2015 06:00 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-10-05 at 11:15 -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
> >> Note, elfutils does not explicitly enable AM_SILENT_RULES.  It's only
> >> available starting from automake 1.11
> > 
> > Note that we already require 1.11 or higher for parallel-tests.
> > I wouldn't mind if we also just added AM_SILENT_RULES([yes]) by default.
> 
> I do prefer silent builds too.  You'll probably want to force V=1 for
> automated builds like rpm though.  I leave the default choice to you.

OK, I'll add AM_SILENT_RULES([yes]) as default unless someone objects.
(btw. the rpm builds currently use make -s, so using the silent rules
would actually give more output.)

> It's easy to answer "what defines" -- they're set in /usr/bin/automake
> handle_languages() based on $lang->ccer and $lang->lder, which are names
> declared in earlier register_language() calls.
> 
> I have no idea if they're "officially" OK though.  It's strange that
> these aren't documented at all.  In practice it should be fine, I think,
> but if you want to be really careful we can define our own renamed variants.

Odd they aren't officially documented. But they look official enough. I
saw other projects also use them in front of LINK and COMPILE steps, so
we are at least in good company. So please do just use them as is.

Thanks,

Mark