a contentious configure idea: --quiet

[Nathanael Nerode]

>At present, top-level configure.in has:
>
>baseargs="$baseargs --program-transform-name='${gcc_transform_name}'"
>build_configargs="--cache-file=../config.cache --build=${build_alias} --host=${build_alias} ${baseargs}"
>host_configargs="--cache-file=./config.cache --build=${build_alias} --host=${host_alias} --target=${target_alias} ${extra_host_args} ${baseargs}"
>target_configargs=${baseargs}
>
>When building the compiler with make -j, configure output is
>effectively useless: the messages are interleaved and fly by much too
>fast to read.  If configure ever fails, one always consults
>config.log, not the terminal output, for details.
Ah, but when building without make -j, I find it useful -- and particularly
when I'm debugging changes to the configure scripts, which have been known
to cause trouble which is *not* recorded in config.log.

>In my local tree, I've added --quiet to `baseargs' above and it seems
>to be a useful change.  Is this something that might be universally
>accepted?  At the very least, adding --quiet to $target_configargs
>means that configuring the target libraries won't generate reams of
>noise on multilib targets.  Opinions?
Well, it basically seems reasonable, but I don't want to happen automatically,
because I'd just have to turn it off every time I was working on configure
scripts (which is most of the time).

Did you know that if you pass --quiet to the top level configure, it should
be passed down to all the subconfigures?...

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/