On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/06/2017 09:28 AM, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hello Luc, >>> >>> On 11/05/2017 05:25 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: >>>> @@ -175,10 +168,12 @@ ldflags += $($(@)_LDFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) >>>> ldlibs += $($(@)_LDLIBS) $(LDLIBS) >>>> $(foreach p,$(PROGRAMS),$(eval $(p): $($(p)_OBJS))) >>>> $(PROGRAMS): % : %.o $(LIBS) >>>> - $(QUIET_LINK)$(LD) $(ldflags) $^ $(ldlibs) -o $@ >>>> + @echo " LD $@" >>>> + $(Q)$(LD) $(ldflags) $^ $(ldlibs) -o $@ >>> >>> Is it intended that you introduce changed behaviour here? Now you get >>> the pretty printed output when building with V=1. >> >> It was not the intention as such but, yes, I knew the behaviour changed. >> I don't think the new behaviour is a problem, on the contrary, but if it is >> a problem it can be changed back. > > I don't consider it problematic, the added benefit is that it becomes > easier to relate a V=1 build with a V=0 build. Indeed. > But IMHO this should not > be sold as "simpler logic" without any further comment. Yes. It's not the only patch in this series which commit message should be improved. -- Luc -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
