On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 23:36:54 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I assume you aren't specifying --jobs=[2,3,4,...]. Very useful
> embellishment of emerge: gets things done in half the time.
--jobs=2 doubles the number of ebuilds being merged, not the number of
cores in your processor :-O
It is faste
On Sunday 18 April 2010 17:29:12 YoYo siska wrote:
> You can still break the emerge (for example with ctrl-c) when it
> starts to emerge gcc, the continue the emerge process with emerge
> --resume --skipfirst
>
> that's what I usually do with openoffice and similar apps when I do a
> "quick" upd
On 2010-04-18 1:58 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:00:40 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>
>> After masking gcc (and glibc - same argument there), I get:
>>
>> emerge -pev world
>>
>>
>>
>> Total: 351 packages (351 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 5 kB
>> Portage tree and overlays:
>> [
On 2010-04-18 3:57 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
>> Will etc-update still prompt for all necessary changes for config
>> files for *all* of the installs done, considering I did ctrl-c 3
>> times (glibc, and both gcc's)?
> yes, if new config files got installed, etc-update will show them (I
> think it uses
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 03:54:38PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 3:49 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> > On 2010-04-18 1:09 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
> >> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 12:52:26PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> >>> On 2010-04-18 12:29 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:57:48AM
On 2010-04-18 3:49 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 1:09 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 12:52:26PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> On 2010-04-18 12:29 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:57:48AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimme
On 2010-04-18 1:09 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 12:52:26PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> On 2010-04-18 12:29 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:57:48AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimmel wrote:
> well... you could use --keep-go
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:00:40 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> After masking gcc (and glibc - same argument there), I get:
>
> emerge -pev world
>
>
>
> Total: 351 packages (351 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 5 kB
> Portage tree and overlays:
> [0] /usr/portage
> [?] indicates that the source repos
On 2010-04-18 1:11 PM, Vincent Launchbury wrote:
> On 04/18/10 11:00, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> Crap, doesn't look like this will work...
>>
>> After masking gcc (and glibc - same argument there), I get:
>>
>> emerge -pev world
>>
>>
>> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "virtual/libc" have been mask
On 04/18/10 11:00, Tanstaafl wrote:
> Crap, doesn't look like this will work...
>
> After masking gcc (and glibc - same argument there), I get:
>
> emerge -pev world
> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "virtual/libc" have been masked.
> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 12:52:26PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 12:29 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:57:48AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> >> On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimmel wrote:
> >>> well... you could use --keep-going and kill something when gcc
> >>> compil
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 04:59:07PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> Is there a way to emerge, say, system, but omit one package in it?
>
> For example, I've already recompiled gcc 4.3.4 with itself... is there a
> way to now do something like:
>
> emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage
On 2010-04-18 12:29 PM, YoYo siska wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:57:48AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimmel wrote:
>>> well... you could use --keep-going and kill something when gcc
>>> compiles. not very nice, but will work without breaking
>>> anything.
>> D
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:57:48AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimmel wrote:
> > well... you could use --keep-going and kill something when gcc compiles.
> > not very nice, but will work without breaking anything.
>
> Dang - I already started the emerge...
You can s
On 2010-04-18 11:57 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimmel wrote:
>> well... you could use --keep-going and kill something when gcc compiles.
>> not very nice, but will work without breaking anything.
Hmmm... clarification though... when you say 'kill something'... how
woul
On 2010-04-18 11:54 AM, Arttu V. wrote:
> On 4/18/10, Tanstaafl wrote:
You could try temporarily masking it:
#echo sys-devel/gcc >> /etc/portage/package.mask
Then updating:
#emerge -e system
Then removing the mask:
#sed -i '$d' /etc/portage/package.mask
On 2010-04-18 11:45 AM, Johannes Kimmel wrote:
> well... you could use --keep-going and kill something when gcc compiles.
> not very nice, but will work without breaking anything.
Dang - I already started the emerge...
I'm surprised there's no easy way to do this... I guess just because you
don't
On 4/18/10, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> You could try temporarily masking it:
>>> #echo sys-devel/gcc >> /etc/portage/package.mask
>>>
>>> Then updating:
>>> #emerge -e system
>>>
>>> Then removing the mask:
>>> #sed -i '$d' /etc/portage/package.mask
>>>
>>> I don't know of any emerge flag that does this
Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2010-04-17 6:29 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2010-04-17 6:06 PM, Vincent Launchbury wrote:
On 04/17/10 17:09, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2010-04-17 4:59 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage to compile
everything *but* gcc)?
Of course I meant:
On 2010-04-17 6:29 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-17 6:06 PM, Vincent Launchbury wrote:
>> On 04/17/10 17:09, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> On 2010-04-17 4:59 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage to compile
everything *but* gcc)?
>
>>> Of course I meant:
On 2010-04-17 6:06 PM, Vincent Launchbury wrote:
> On 04/17/10 17:09, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> On 2010-04-17 4:59 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage to compile
>>> everything *but* gcc)?
>> Of course I meant:
>>
>> emerge -e system -gcc
> You could try tem
On 04/17/10 17:09, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 2010-04-17 4:59 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage to compile
>> everything *but* gcc)?
>
> Of course I meant:
>
> emerge -e system -gcc
You could try temporarily masking it:
#echo sys-devel/gcc >> /etc/portage
On 2010-04-17 4:59 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage to compile
> everything *but* gcc)?
Of course I meant:
emerge -e system -gcc
Is there a way to emerge, say, system, but omit one package in it?
For example, I've already recompiled gcc 4.3.4 with itself... is there a
way to now do something like:
emerge system -gcc (where '-gcc' serves to tell portage to compile
everything *but* gcc)?
Its not a big deal, I'm just curious
24 matches
Mail list logo
