Re: [PATCH] libtool -- don't print warnings with --silent

[Peter O'Gorman]

On 09/01/2011 09:25 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> > This turns off warnings for --silent (and turns them on again for
> > --verbose).
> >
> > But I am not sure that --silent was meant to imply "no warnings",
> > rather it turns off the verbose compile/link messages.
> >
> > Would a new --no-warnings option be more appropriate?
>
> I agree that a new option would be more appropriate. However, it should
> be a user-provided configuration option (when building the package) and
> not something which will be hard-coded into Makefiles by developers. The
> --silent option should have been handled the same so that the person
> building the software can easily decide if the build should be silent.

Hi Bob,

Well, it has to be an option that Dave can add to site.exp for the 
failing tests in gcc. The tests are failing on HP-UX because libtool is 
outputing "this platform does not like uninstalled shared libraries" 
crap to stderr.

Though I am sorely tempted to simply delete those warnings altogether, I 
think the --no-warn option is better.

I'll give you a day to veto this patch, if you don't then I will commit 
on Saturday. It essentially copies the --no-warn flag from libtoolize to 
libtool.

Peter

0001-Add-flag-to-inhibit-warnings.patch
Description: Text Data