Eclipse Community Forums: DSDP - Real-Time Software Components (RTSC)

Help

Home

Home » Archived » DSDP - Real-Time Software Components (RTSC) » Configuro Output

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator

Configuro Output [message #4293]

Wed, 17 June 2009 02:50

Brad Griffis

Messages: 8
Registered: July 2009

Junior Member

Is there a way to reduce the amount of data currently being spewed out by
the tools/configuro? Do we really need all the info (Generating
interfaces, etc.)? For top-level build I would just want to see something
like âRunning configuration step for app.cfgâ, not all the data. What
I believe is just the ânormalâ info being output seems more
appropriate to a âverboseâ output. All the stuff spewing out makes
some people nervous because they feel disconnected from whatâs
happening, i.e. too much stuff whizzing past on the screen. I think
something like âRunning configuration step for app.cfgâ would be
easier to follow. Only if something is screwed up would I want to see
more.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Configuro Output [message #4432 is a reply to message #4293]

Wed, 17 June 2009 14:48

Dave Russo

Messages: 172
Registered: July 2009

Senior Member

Brad Griffis wrote:
> Is there a way to reduce the amount of data currently being spewed out
> by the tools/configuro? Do we really need all the info (Generating
> interfaces, etc.)? For top-level build I would just want to see
> something like "Running configuration step for app.cfg", not all the
> data. What I believe is just the "normal" info being output seems
> more appropriate to a "verbose" output. All the stuff spewing out
> makes some people nervous because they feel disconnected from what's
> happening, i.e. too much stuff whizzing past on the screen. I think
> something like "Running configuration step for app.cfg" would be
> easier to follow. Only if something is screwed up would I want to see
> more.
>
I agree.

On the other hand, there are good reasons for keeping the output. The
output provides feedback about the tools progress (which can take some
time) and when something goes wrong the error message makes more sense
in the context of what the tool is doing at the time. For example,
errors may come from the target's compiler and, without a message saying
we are compiling a specific file, it _really_ does not make sense.

Perhaps a --quite flag can be added to xdc.tools.configuro to eliminate
the progress messages.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Configuro Output [message #4501 is a reply to message #4432]

Wed, 17 June 2009 16:08

Brad Griffis

Messages: 8
Registered: July 2009

Junior Member

Yes, I think a --quiet would be good. In the case of some kind of
error/warning then it would be good for it to tell us that it's an error
compiling a file or whatever it might be. In other words, don't tell me
what you're doing unless something goes wrong. In most cases I would
expect/hope to get enough info from the error message to fix the problem
without having to turn off --quiet and re-do the build.

So potentially this may require a little re-working of some error
messages. If the error message is overly dependent on the user having all
the status info then we may want to repeat that info in the error message.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Configuro Output [message #4571 is a reply to message #4501]

Wed, 17 June 2009 16:42

Dave Russo

Messages: 172
Registered: July 2009

Senior Member

Brad Griffis wrote:
> Yes, I think a --quiet would be good. In the case of some kind of
> error/warning then it would be good for it to tell us that it's an error
> compiling a file or whatever it might be. In other words, don't tell me
> what you're doing unless something goes wrong. In most cases I would
> expect/hope to get enough info from the error message to fix the problem
> without having to turn off --quiet and re-do the build.
>
> So potentially this may require a little re-working of some error
> messages. If the error message is overly dependent on the user having
> all the status info then we may want to repeat that info in the error
> message.
>
>
The problem is that the configuration process involves many tools that
XDC does not control; as a result, many of the error messages _can't_ be
changed. For example, errors can come from the target's
compiler/linker, GNU make, cygwin, ...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Configuro Output [message #4640 is a reply to message #4571]

Wed, 24 June 2009 15:21

Brad Griffis

Messages: 8
Registered: July 2009

Junior Member

dave russo wrote:

> Brad Griffis wrote:
>> Yes, I think a --quiet would be good. In the case of some kind of
>> error/warning then it would be good for it to tell us that it's an error
>> compiling a file or whatever it might be. In other words, don't tell me
>> what you're doing unless something goes wrong. In most cases I would
>> expect/hope to get enough info from the error message to fix the problem
>> without having to turn off --quiet and re-do the build.
>>
>> So potentially this may require a little re-working of some error
>> messages. If the error message is overly dependent on the user having
>> all the status info then we may want to repeat that info in the error
>> message.
>>
>>
> The problem is that the configuration process involves many tools that
> XDC does not control; as a result, many of the error messages _can't_ be
> changed. For example, errors can come from the target's
> compiler/linker, GNU make, cygwin, ...

Let's try it out and we'll see how it goes. If nothing else, once we get
things building properly it will be nice to throw the --quiet switch and
simplify/shrink the build output.

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	compilation error in "RTSC Module Primer" Lesson2
Next Topic:	XDC Producer's Guide

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

]

Current Time: Thu Apr 18 00:46:54 GMT 2024

.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Breadcrumbs

Sign up to our Newsletter