Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 18/01/13 03:13 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > > I wonder if anybody uses unattended [backup+]emerge as cron job. > I'm really temped to do so, but with users relying on these > machines I'm always chicken-out. > I used to, up until around 2006-200

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > >> On 01/18/2013 09:28 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: >> > but - and that's quite important i guess - i only use my own clone of >> > the portage tree which i sync from time to time and i al

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > On 01/18/2013 09:28 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > > but - and that's quite important i guess - i only use my own clone of > > the portage tree which i sync from time to time and i also keep > > different versions stable, etc. > HEAVY USER! But

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On 01/18/2013 09:28 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > i've refrained from doing unattended upgrades for a long time, but i'm > quite confident in updateworld these days and i usually test it on 2-3 > machines and then let the other 50+ machines do it unattended and it has > been working fine so far ... go

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > I wonder if anybody uses unattended [backup+]emerge as cron job. > I'm really temped to do so, but with users relying on these machines I'm > always chicken-out. > i've refrained from doing unattended upgrades for a long time, but i'm quite

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On 01/18/2013 08:36 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Michael Weber > wrote: > I'd like to drop one strong suggestion about configuration management > that might be beneficial here: use version control software! > or even /etc/.git ... it s

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to drop one strong suggestion about configuration management > that might be beneficial here: use version control software! > > Some machines (esp. those with shared administration) have /etc/portage > under git [1] with >

update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

Hi, I'd like to drop one strong suggestion about configuration management that might be beneficial here: use version control software! Some machines (esp. those with shared administration) have /etc/portage under git [1] with - /var/lib/portage/world symlinked to /etc/portage/world - PORTDIR_OV

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/17/2013 12:11 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > > ... so what's the problem here, exactly? > I don't want @world to get screwed up, either by having unnecessary packages, or by missing ones we need. > (a) 'emerge -u [pkg]' adds extra bits to @wo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 17/01/13 11:31 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/17/2013 09:52 AM, Zac Medico wrote: >>> >>> I strongly believe that it shouldn't; nevertheless, it does. >> >> You can avoid this by adding --select=n to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS. >> Then, if you wa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On 01/17/2013 09:52 AM, Zac Medico wrote: >> >> I strongly believe that it shouldn't; nevertheless, it does. > > You can avoid this by adding --select=n to EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS. Then, if > you want to add something to world, use --select (or -w in latest > portage which isn't marked stable yet). T

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/01/13 10:24 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Michael Weber > wrote: >> how does portage @preserved-libs work? maybe we could emerge >> @update[s] and @glsa. > > @glsa actually makes a lot of sense. I'm not convince

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On 01/16/2013 09:32 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/16/2013 12:24 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> On 16/01/13 11:47 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >>> On 01/16/2013 11:36 AM, Michael Weber wrote: >> emerge --upgrade with a predefined EMERGE_UPGRADE_OPTS in make.conf (where EMERG

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On 01/16/2013 04:00 PM, Michael Weber wrote: > On 01/16/2013 06:33 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> Yes, sorry for the confusion. I use more than one package manager, >> and when doing an "update" or "upgrade" I'm basically flipping a >> coin. > hehe, as long as we don't --dist-upgrade ;-) > the g wa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

Rich Freeman wrote: > I'd just stick with a simple parameter like --upgrade Yes please! > or an alternative command name like emerge-update. Please no! > Oh, here's another crazy thought. How about some directory in /etc > that sets rules for emerge-update (or whatever we call it)? You might

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Michael Weber wrote: > how does portage @preserved-libs work? maybe we could emerge > @update[s] and @glsa. @glsa actually makes a lot of sense. I'm not convinced we want @updates as a shortcut for a bunch of settings though. Sets are just about picking which pa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 01/16/2013 06:33 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > Yes, sorry for the confusion. I use more than one package manager, > and when doing an "update" or "upgrade" I'm basically flipping a > coin. hehe, as long as we don't --dist-upgrade ;-) the g was int

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/16/2013 12:24 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > > --upgrade wouldn't (couldn't, imo) replace --update. > Yes, sorry for the confusion. I use more than one package manager, and when doing an "update" or "upgrade" I'm basically flipping a coin. I j

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/16/2013 12:24 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 16/01/13 11:47 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> On 01/16/2013 11:36 AM, Michael Weber wrote: >>> > emerge --upgrade >>> with a predefined EMERGE_UPGRADE_OPTS in make.conf (where >>> EMERGE_DEFAUL

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/01/13 11:47 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/16/2013 11:36 AM, Michael Weber wrote: >> emerge --upgrade >> with a predefined EMERGE_UPGRADE_OPTS in make.conf (where >> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS lives). > > +1 so I can stop adding --oneshot

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 16/01/13 11:49 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/16/2013 11:47 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> On 01/16/2013 11:36 AM, Michael Weber wrote: >>> > emerge --upgrade >>> with a predefined EMERGE_UPGRADE_OPTS in make.conf (where >>> EMERGE_DEFA

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On 01/16/2013 11:47 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/16/2013 11:36 AM, Michael Weber wrote: >> emerge --upgrade >> with a predefined EMERGE_UPGRADE_OPTS in make.conf (where >> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS lives). > > +1 so I can stop adding --oneshot onto every upgrade. Oh, damn, this isn't sugges

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On 01/16/2013 11:36 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > >>> emerge --upgrade > with a predefined EMERGE_UPGRADE_OPTS in make.conf (where > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS lives). +1 so I can stop adding --oneshot onto every upgrade.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On 01/15/2013 09:51 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: >> emerge --sync layman -S eix-sync #layman... porticron # from porticron update-gentoo # cvs setup https://xmw.de/dotfiles/bin/update-gentoo >> emerge --upgrade with a predefined EMER

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: > We're halfway there; > > emerge --sync > > So how about adding: > > emerge --upgrade > > ? I was thinking the same thing! Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

Rich Freeman wrote: > Anybody who runs debian knows that the only two commands you really > need to know are apt-get --update and apt-get --upgrade. We really > need to keep things just that simple. We're halfway there; emerge --sync So how about adding: emerge --upgrade ? //Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> Bikeshedding, but I'm thinking that it would be better to provide a >> whole separate command for this rather than a quicker convenience >> option -- the command would, for instan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/01/13 09:39 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Ian Stakenvicius > wrote: >> Bikeshedding, but I'm thinking that it would be better to provide >> a whole separate command for this rather than a quicker >> convenience

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/01/13 09:39 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > BTW, what happened with -u? I still use it because I'm used to it, > but it seems to have gone away (i.e. I can't find it in the current > man page). It's there: " --update (-u) Up

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > Bikeshedding, but I'm thinking that it would be better to provide a > whole separate command for this rather than a quicker convenience > option -- the command would, for instance, also include @world as the > target by default. As for th

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/01/13 09:16 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Rich Freeman > wrote: >> I'd make it easy-to-remember though - either a one-letter option, >> or something short. > > +1. Maybe just -U? > >> Some open questions: 1.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > I'd make it easy-to-remember though - either a one-letter option, or > something short. +1. Maybe just -U? > Some open questions: > 1. What is the correct use-flag behavior - -N, or --reinstall=changed-use? > 2. What is the correct --with-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > I wonder if it might be pertinent for future portage's to install an > alias command, "emerge-system-update" or similar, that would wrap the > standardly accepted emerge update command more or less everyone > already runs.. easier end-use

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/01/13 02:20 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > Hi folks, > > this commit changes the set of USE flags on the just stabled > gcc-4.6, running a huge number into an rebuild of an freshly > updated package. (emerge --newuse recaclulates from "go disabled

[gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

Hi folks, this commit changes the set of USE flags on the just stabled gcc-4.6, running a huge number into an rebuild of an freshly updated package. (emerge --newuse recaclulates from "go disabled" to "go missing") Wouldn't it be possible to a) refrain from this change (really, who has USE=go tur