Add option -o outfile #189
Conversation
Newer Meson warns about default behavior of run_command.
WARNING: You should add the boolean check kwarg to the run_command call.
It currently defaults to false,
but it will default to true in future releases of meson.
See also: mesonbuild/meson#9300
This commit explicitly adds the current default value, false, to the
check argument.
Signed-off-by: Yasushi SHOJI <yashi@spacecubics.com>
Add a new option to specify output file. This is useful when the command is not run from a shell and redirect '>' is not an option. Signed-off-by: Yasushi SHOJI <yashi@spacecubics.com>
|
Thank you for your submission! Can you tell us why you feel this option is necessary instead of, say, using output redirection? |
|
Hi, Thank you for a nice tool! As I wrote in a commit message some tools exec without shell, such as CMake in my case. without any shell, you can't use redirection, '>', to create a file. |
|
I missed the commit message, sorry, and thank you for the explanation. |
|
Merged, thanks! |
| @@ -56,7 +56,8 @@ jo1 = custom_target('jo.1', | |||
| command: [pandoc_commands, '@OUTPUT@', '@INPUT@']).full_path() | |||
| run_command(pandoc_commands, | |||
| join_paths(meson.current_build_dir(), 'jo.1'), | |||
| join_paths(meson.current_source_dir(), 'jo.pandoc')) | |||
| join_paths(meson.current_source_dir(), 'jo.pandoc'), | |||
| check: false) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The point of Meson adding the warning was specifically to make people consider whether they need to check the return value, so choosing "false" based purely on it being the old default seems wrong.
Let's instead look at the command in question and ponder: do we need to check this?
What happens if the pandoc command totally fails? Should this be an error? Probably.
This PR is to add a new option
-o outfile.While adding it, I found that meson is generating a warning about run_command. This PR includes a small fix for that as well.