Should portage hide build output from the user by default?

Message

chithanh · Post by **chithanh** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:44 am

There has recently been a discussion on gentoo-dev about making portage output less noisy
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/m ... 2a17bd.xml

A solution was implemented to suppress the build output (the configure, make and install) by default, unless the user specifies --quiet-build=n explicitly. There were both supporters and critics of that idea, but no real data about what users think. A compromise was originally proposed on IRC by tommy and forwarded to the -dev mailiing list by me, to make -v (--verbose) control whether build output is shown or not by default.

What are your opinions?

Post by **floppymaster** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:48 am

I voted for the first option (hide by default), but don't feel super-strongly about it. I really dislike tying it to the -v option, however.

chithanh · Post by **chithanh** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:49 am

It is not tied to -v, the user can still override with --default-build=...

jdhore · Post by **jdhore** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:52 am

I think preferably build output should be shown by default and that's what i voted for. I'd personally also be fine with -v controlling display of build output as well because for me, it's basically become reflex to always call emerge with -av (when installing stuff/updating).

The --quiet-build=y option is still there if you want it, but IMO, the people who have been annoyed with long build output have already likely turned it on in the past and a large number really don't care so it's not helping or harming them either way, so why not keep to the default that's been used for 12 years now (in Gentoo) and display build stuff by default.

Post by **floppymaster** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:55 am

chithanh wrote:It is not tied to -v, the user can still override with --default-build=...

Right. I don't think -v should have any effect on it whatsoever.

rafaelmartins · Post by **rafaelmartins** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:58 am

I voted to maintain the old behavior (defaulting to --quiet-build=n). There's no reason to change this at this point, other to make some noise on the community, with no actual gain.

davidm · Post by **davidm** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 2:52 am

rafaelmartins wrote:I voted to maintain the old behavior (defaulting to --quiet-build=n). There's no reason to change this at this point, other to make some noise on the community, with no actual gain.

Right. Lacking a clear beneficial reason (for the majority) there doesn't seem to be a logical reason for changing it. But for what it's worth it's not a big deal to me as long as I am able to change the behavior. That said if I specify -v I expect to see the output.

steveL · Post by **steveL** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:12 am

It isn't made clear in the poll that this only applies to emerge with no --jobs/-j parameter and as jdhore said even there users can already use --quiet-build=y to get rid of terminal output. So for most emerge's it's not an issue; many users have --jobs or -j N in their EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS, and we're only discussing the occasion when a single package is being built, or at least we would be if that were sanely handled, so jobs weren't considered, or --jobs 1 was handled properly (based on my experience of working against stable portage, it should be noted.)

With that in mind, I voted in favour of the existing defaults as well.

Personally I'd like to see better handling of --jobs as noted; -q / -v controlling the output verbosity seems like a natural fit and is what we do in [topic=546828]update[/topic] when --jobs isn't being used or only one package is being built. So in that sense it doesn't affect me, as it's no difficulty to make update use --quiet-build=n for single-stepped installs, and I only ever run emerge via update unless I'm checking -t. But it does seem ill thought-out to me, and could have done with a fuller discussion.

Website · Post by **zmedico** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:28 am

Ever since I added --jobs support, I've felt that suppression of build output would be a better default for at least the following reasons:

I estimate that the flooding of the terminal with build output is useless for more than 99% of users. Usually, there's too much information scrolling by at too high of a rate for it to be intelligible. Having this as the default behavior is ridiculous and leads to jokes like apt-gentoo [1]. Generally, people who want to analyze build output are best served by PORT_LOGDIR.

With --quiet-build, the user is presented with a useful summary of overall progress, along with current load average data. Why should we expose new users to legacy defaults that are useless to more than 99% of users, when they would most likely prefer the --quiet-build display?

Some of those who seek to revert the --quiet-build default have attacked my 99% estimate, but I stand by it. You have to factor in the "silent majority" that welcomes the change and does not express it publicly. A forum thread like this one tends to attract a "vocal minority", which tends to skew results in way that does not give a fair statistical representation of the gentoo population as a whole (it excludes the "silent majority").

chithanh wrote:The -v option should control whether build output is shown or not by default

I think that would be too fragile because you could easily have people using -v and getting the --quiet-build=n behavior even though they didn't want it. I think most people would prefer to avoid the --quiet-build=n behavior since, generally, people who want to analyze build output are better served by PORT_LOGDIR.

Post by **Chiitoo** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:09 am

I voted for emerge should show build output by default (unless --quiet-build=y) though I have very mixed feelings about it. Not showing it by default is probably the more sane way to go. It's like a silly feature I like to keep; I did find it interesting as a new user, maybe a little bit overwhelming, but more interested than anything. I did like it, and usually never hide it unless running with --jobs but it indeed is not like I ever needed it.

The more I think about it, the more indecisive I become about which one I would put in place, as a default.
I am glad that I don't have to make that decision! ^^;

Kollin · Post by **Kollin** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:53 am

I voted for 'emerge should hide build output by default (unless --quiet-build=n) because with MAKEOPTS="-j4" the output is useless anyway.
Whenever something goes wrong i have to re-emerge with 'FEATURES='-ccache' MAKEOPTS='-j1' emerge -1 sys-apps/xxx, from now on i'll just add and --quiet-build=n to this line

keeperofdakeys · Post by **keeperofdakeys** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:32 am

Personally I think the build log shouldn't be shown by default, there are too few cases where I actually want it; the build summary is much more useful. I also think binding it to -v is a horrible idea, as I use the -v output for a lot of build considerations, of which I don't need the build output. So I suggest to make --quiet-build=y default, but add a single character flag that is an alias to --quiet-build=n. For those people that actually want the functionality, a single flag should be easy to activate when they require it.

Trog Dog · Post by **Trog Dog** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:37 am

I voted for for the output to be shown as the default. I feel it lets newbs know that their machine is actually doing something during an emerge and it's not stalled.

aCOSwt · Post by **aCOSwt** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:22 am

davidm wrote:
rafaelmartins wrote:I voted to maintain the old behavior (defaulting to --quiet-build=n). There's no reason to change this at this point, other to make some noise on the community, with no actual gain.
Right. Lacking a clear beneficial reason (for the majority) there doesn't seem to be a logical reason for changing it.

+1

Trog Dog wrote:I voted for for the output to be shown as the default.

<respectfully joking>Could this option not be applied to your signature ?<respectfully joking>

golagoda · Post by **golagoda** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:00 pm

Voted for 'emerge should show build output by default (unless --quiet-build=y)'

It's just too late to change the default behavior of such a big thing, sure I'd like to have it like that 90% of the time and I do but it should not be the default.

disi · Post by **disi** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:02 pm

aCOSwt wrote:
davidm wrote:
rafaelmartins wrote:I voted to maintain the old behavior (defaulting to --quiet-build=n). There's no reason to change this at this point, other to make some noise on the community, with no actual gain.
Right. Lacking a clear beneficial reason (for the majority) there doesn't seem to be a logical reason for changing it.
+1
Trog Dog wrote:I voted for for the output to be shown as the default.
<respectfully joking>Could this option not be applied to your signature ?<respectfully joking>

If I just emerge one package, it shows at the end in the output something like, installing... and then which binaries and files are copied where. I can see straight away what got installed and how to start the program.

Maybe, we could break it down into:
emerge output
configure/build output
install output
?

At the moment it gives very very little information, only which package it currently works on.

dalek · Post by **dalek** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:27 pm

As posted on -dev, I like it the way it was. When something fails, I can see the error and I have something to google for without going into dig mode in some file somewhere in /var.

I also don't like this being tied to -v. I have -v set in make.conf because I always check USE flag changes. That usually saves me from having to compile something twice, which can mean a LOT on my old rig.

I also like something someone else said. You can see what files were installed and see what to run to start it. I hadn't even thought of that one but I do that sometimes too. Just scroll up and see what went into *bin to use it.

Leave it like it was, let people that want it suppressed change the default. That's what people expect.

few · Post by **few** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:37 pm

A more interesting poll would be why people actually want a particular behaviour.

I see lots of people starting with "I want the old behaviour, because if something fails..." and then complaining about that it's too hard to find the log. This is just wrong as it a) points you to the log file and b) dumps the log onto you if only one thing failed. Maybe this is just of a matter of communicationg what the new behaviour really is instead of letting people guess what it is.

Trog Dog · Post by **Trog Dog** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 2:41 pm

aCOSwt wrote:<respectfully joking>Could this option not be applied to your signature ?<respectfully joking>

OT: <respectfully explaining>http://www.ted.com/talks/jay_bradner_op ... earch.html

OT2: comiserations les blues

cryptosteve · Post by **cryptosteve** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 2:49 pm

It's ok for me now. I can configure a verbose output as easy as I have configured a silent build before.

yermandu · Post by **yermandu** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:39 pm

emerge should hide build output by default , we have the choice to show output with another options, i think is nice.

yellowhat · Post by **yellowhat** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:26 pm

I think that emerge process should be visible as default (--quiet-build=n).
Because in this way I can see the progress and where is it (fetch, configure, compile, install).

saellaven · Post by **saellaven** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:41 pm

when I'm building a single package, especially if it is failing, I like watching the output go by. When I'm building in parallel (--jobs option), I prefer the current behavior where it shows what jobs it is working on rather than the output. I can always pull up the build logs of specific packages as it goes or if they fail.

It's not like turning off the noise also turns off the logging.

chrisstankevitz · Post by **chrisstankevitz** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:47 pm

Show the output or don't -- either decision will be fine and neither decision will be thought of as a "major mistake" in the future.

avx · Post by **avx** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:56 pm

voted: hide by default

I've got it turned off for a long time, mainly because it dramatically slows down the built when on VT (yeah, crappy driver). Unless something fails, I won't need it and in that case, there's still the .log.

No to binding it to -v, confusing for me.

Should portage hide build output from the user by default?

Show or hide build output by default?

Should portage hide build output from the user by default?