See patch.
Uwe.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Uwe Hermann uwe@hermann-uwe.de wrote:
See patch.
Thanks for finding the build I missed.
I'd prefer having "(This may take a while)" on the next line so that it doesn't wrap.
I prefer - print ' SCONFIG Output File:', os.path.basename( outputfilename)
over custom splits and joins.
+ print ' SCONFIG ', join(outputfilename.split('/')[-5:], '/')
Can we go back to os.path.basename? If so: Acked-by: Myles Watson mylesgw@gmail.com
Thanks, Myles
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Myles Watson mylesgw@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Uwe Hermann uwe@hermann-uwe.de wrote:
See patch.
Thanks for finding the build I missed.
I'd prefer having "(This may take a while)" on the next line so that it doesn't wrap.
I prefer
- print ' SCONFIG Output File:', os.path.basename(
outputfilename)
over custom splits and joins.
- print ' SCONFIG ', join(outputfilename.split('/')[-5:], '/')
I can see the point to having part of the path there. It can help us keep things in the correct directories. I keep finding places where we accidentally put things in the top directory.
Acked-by: Myles Watson mylesgw@gmail.com
Thanks, Myles
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:28:48AM -0600, Myles Watson wrote:
Thanks for finding the build I missed.
No problem.
I'd prefer having "(This may take a while)" on the next line so that it doesn't wrap.
Hm? I don't understand what exactly wraps here? It should be one line only, no wrapping.
I prefer
- print ' SCONFIG Output File:', os.path.basename(
outputfilename)
over custom splits and joins.
- print ' SCONFIG ', join(outputfilename.split('/')[-5:], '/')
Can we go back to os.path.basename? If so:
We could, but that's not consistent. This is the output with os.path.basename:
SCONFIG config.py SCONFIG static.c SCONFIG static.dot
and this with the splits and joins:
SCONFIG mainboard/asus/p2b-f/config.py SCONFIG mainboard/asus/p2b-f/static.c SCONFIG mainboard/asus/p2b-f/static.dot
As we do print the paths (relative to the build dir) for the other files in the build output, I think we should do that here too.
Acked-by: Myles Watson mylesgw@gmail.com
Thanks, r4880.
Uwe.
I'd prefer having "(This may take a while)" on the next line so that it doesn't wrap.
Hm? I don't understand what exactly wraps here? It should be one line only, no wrapping.
HOSTCC /home/myles/try/buildrom-devel/work/coreboot/svn/build/romcc (this may take a while)
Thanks, Myles
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:17:17AM -0600, Myles Watson wrote:
I'd prefer having "(This may take a while)" on the next line so that it doesn't wrap.
Hm? I don't understand what exactly wraps here? It should be one line only, no wrapping.
HOSTCC /home/myles/try/buildrom-devel/work/coreboot/svn/build/romcc (this may take a while)
Ah, that was fixed by the following hunk in my patch:
- @printf " HOSTCC $(obj)/romcc (this may take a while)\n" + @printf " HOSTCC $(subst $(obj)/,,$(@)) (this may take a while)\n"
Uwe.