On Tue, 6 Dec 2011 08:58:23 +, Mick wrote:
> On Sunday 04 Dec 2011 20:49:55 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:18:40 +, Mick wrote:
> > > But then if there were say 5 ebuilds running in parallel and all
> > > their output printed in the same terminal, it would be almightily
>
On Sunday 04 Dec 2011 20:49:55 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:18:40 +, Mick wrote:
> > But then if there were say 5 ebuilds running in parallel and all their
> > output printed in the same terminal, it would be almightily difficult
> > to untangle the spaghetti that may show up in
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 15:18:40 +, Mick wrote:
> But then if there were say 5 ebuilds running in parallel and all their
> output printed in the same terminal, it would be almightily difficult
> to untangle the spaghetti that may show up in an error?
Which is why setting -j >1 sets wh
--
Neil Bo
On Sunday 04 Dec 2011 14:05:29 Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 08:27:33AM +, Mick wrote:
> > > > Remerged python, verified the right python via eselect, remerge
> > > > portage, etc etc etc etc I just can't seem to get proper output from
> > > > emerge anymore no matter what
On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 08:27:33AM +, Mick wrote:
> > > Remerged python, verified the right python via eselect, remerge portage,
> > > etc etc etc etc I just can't seem to get proper output from emerge
> > > anymore no matter what. Other than that everything is working fine, but
> > > I do nee
On Saturday 03 Dec 2011 16:45:19 Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 09:23:48AM -0500, Indi wrote:
> > About a month or so ago I did an update which seems to have caused
> > portage to lose the ability to work verbosely.
> > Ever since it looks like this:
> >
> > idd@gh:[~]9:07:23
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 09:23:48AM -0500, Indi wrote:
> About a month or so ago I did an update which seems to have caused
> portage to lose the ability to work verbosely.
> Ever since it looks like this:
>
> idd@gh:[~]9:07:23 $ sudo emerge -vauND adobe-flash
>
> These are the packages that wo
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 05:20:01PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:37:51 -0500, Indi wrote:
>
> > > that is not the verbose flag, but silent-build.
> >
> > Hmm, I always thought the "-v" was the verbose switch, and that it
> > should work properly regardless of what's in ma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03.12.2011 17:09, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:37:51 -0500, Indi wrote:
>
>>> that is not the verbose flag, but silent-build.
>>
>> Hmm, I always thought the "-v" was the verbose switch, and that
>> it should work properly regardle
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 10:37:51 -0500, Indi wrote:
> > that is not the verbose flag, but silent-build.
>
> Hmm, I always thought the "-v" was the verbose switch, and that it
> should work properly regardless of what's in make.conf. It *used* to
> work properly here, I've been using "emerge -vauND
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 03:40:01PM +0100, Hinnerk van Bruinehsen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> that is not the verbose flag, but silent-build.
Hmm, I always thought the "-v" was the verbose switch, and that it should
work properly regardless of what's in m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
that is not the verbose flag, but silent-build. If you want the old
behaviour back, you can add
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"
to your make.conf
So long
Hinnerk
On 03.12.2011 15:23, Indi wrote:
> Howdy y'all,
>
> About a month or so a
12 matches
Mail list logo
