Re: Make the compilation slightly less verbose?

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hello, Eli.

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 21:58:04 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
> > Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:10:22 +0200
> > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org

> > diff --git a/src/Makefile.in b/src/Makefile.in
> > index be769458d3..5fc623c346 100644
> > --- a/src/Makefile.in
> > +++ b/src/Makefile.in
> > @@ -776,7 +776,8 @@ .PHONY:
> >  ## bootstrap-emacs$(EXEEXT) as an order-only prerequisite.

> >  %.elc: %.el | bootstrap-emacs$(EXEEXT) $(bootstrap_pdmp)
> > -	@$(MAKE) -C ../lisp EMACS="$(bootstrap_exe)" THEFILE=$< $<c
> > +	@$(MAKE) --no-print-directory \
> > +		-C ../lisp EMACS="$(bootstrap_exe)" THEFILE=$< $<c

> >  ## VCSWITNESS points to the file that holds info about the current checkout.
> >  ## We use it as a heuristic to decide when to rebuild loaddefs.el.

> > I now get

> >   ELC      ../lisp/dos-fns.elc
> >   ELC      ../lisp/dos-vars.elc
> >   ELC      ../lisp/dos-w32.elc
> >   ELC      ../lisp/dynamic-setting.elc

> > on a make bootstrap, and otherwise things look the same as before, I
> > think.

> > Does anybody object to this change?

> I don't really see why your personal preferences should be forced on
> all of us.

Well, somebody's personal preference must prevail, unless we introduce a
new configuration option (PLEASE NOT!).

If I understand this correctly, three lines of output were being output
for each file, and the information content of two of these was close to,
if not actually, zero.

So I see this as an objectively desirable change.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).