Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 07:17:57PM +0100, Roland Illig wrote:
> 
>>>Are you sure that this is not breaking scripts which parse the output of
>>>e.g. cc?
>>
>>This change only applies in cases where the compiler is failing anyway, 
>>so I don't think it will break much things. The error message is written 
>>to stderr, so it does not interfere with output from "cc -E", for example.
> 
> 
> Oh, I know that it only applies to error cases. But even the parsing of
> error messages is sometimes done.
> 
> 
>>>I also don't like the way this pollutes e.g. the already
>>>obscure output of configure. Can we direct this to a file please?
>>
>>No. :) The sole intention of this change was to make this message visible.
> 
> 
> I think it is too verbose.

Can you suggest a shorter message that contains all details that may be 
necessary? My reasons for making the message that long are:

* The leading empty line is needed to make the message visible between 
all the other stuff that is printed in case of an error.

* The "[wrapper.sh]" at the start of the second line tells the user 
where the message comes from, so that {s,}he knows immediately where to 
look for related information.

* The rest of that line describes the third line, and I think it must be 
that detailed to explain the situation to an average pkgsrc user.

* The third line contains the full command that had been executed. It 
cannot be shortened in any way, since that could hide necessary details.

Roland