Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:53:49 +0200 | From | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/4] coccicheck: add indexing enhancement options |
| |
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 05:44:01PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > OK thanks. I remove --very-quiet now if --profile is used within SPFLAGS, I'll extend > > this to also avoid --very-quiet if --show-trying is used. SPFLAGS is where you can > > specify extra options that the script doesn't specifically support. > > If it is more convenient, you don't actually have to remove --very-quiet. > You can just put --quiet before --show-trying or --profile. --quiet will > override --very-quiet.
How about just:
if [ "$SPFLAGS" == *"--profile"* -o "$SPFLAGS" == "--show-trying" ]; then FLAGS="--quiet $SPFLAGS" else FLAGS="--very-quiet $SPFLAGS" fi
> > > > > > > > > Originally our use of parmap made output, specia files based on pids. Maybe this > > > > > > > > > is the default for parmap. I found this completely unusable. I guess one > > > > > > > > > could look at the dates to see which file is the most recent one, but it > > > > > > > > > seems tedious. If you are putting the standard output in x.out, then put > > > > > > > > > the standard error in x.err. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll use ${DIR}/coccicheck.$$.err for stderr. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is ${DIR}? and what is $$? > > > > > > > > > > > > When you run scripts/coccicheck we take the absolute directory > > > > > > of it and then go down one level of directory, so in this case it > > > > > > would be the base directory of the Linux kernel. > > > > > > > > > > > > $$ is the PID of the bash script. > > > > > > > > > > OK. I still don't find PIDs useful, but I guess if we are talking about > > > > > the entire output of coccicheck, there is not much else to do. Normally, > > > > > I don't want these files accumulating, and just write over the old ones. > > > > > > > > Which is why I would much prefer to instead just redirect in coccicheck > > > > case stderr to stdout from coccinelle. Is that preferred? > > > > > > Then things will be merged in strange ways. > > > > > > Why not just let the user decide what to do with these things? > > > > Sure, what should be the default? > > I would normally just expect standard output and standard error to appear > randomly on the screen. That is, no management effort from the tool at > all.
But the thing is, stderr is ignored now given that a shell script is used wrapped over a Makefile so if we want what you describe I think we do have to by default do 2>&1 on the spatch run command.
Luis
| |