Le samedi 12 novembre 2011 à 21:49 -0200, Rafael Goncalves Martins a
écrit :
Then why not you and the other 2 guys that approved this change here
(and are the only people I saw approving this, TBH), add
--quiet-build=y to your default emerge opts and avoid this kind of
change?
Regards,
I
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 07:19:35AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/14/2011 12:25 AM, Alex Alexander wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 05:59:21PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
What if we
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 07:22:19AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/14/2011 12:47 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:59, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
I
On 11/15/2011 04:27 AM, Alex Alexander wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 07:19:35AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/14/2011 12:25 AM, Alex Alexander wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 05:59:21PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 05:59:21PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
What if we tried solving this problem by providing more options instead
of trying to guess what the users want? :)
Imagine the
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:59, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
I like the new output, but find it kind of annoying that there's very
little feedback on how far the progress is within
On 14 November 2011 03:25, Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 05:59:21PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
What if we tried solving this problem by providing more
On 11/14/11 09:25, Alex Alexander wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 05:59:21PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
What if we tried solving this problem by providing more options instead
of trying to
Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/13/2011 03:09 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things (adding
quiet-build=n to the
default emerge opts or searching for and opening the build.log)
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:17:28 +0100:
Here is some feedback then. I liked it the way it was. When a build
fails, I do a one of install of that package and I like to see the
output. Why, because sometimes it gives me a hint as to why it failed
or something I can google
Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:17:28 +0100:
Here is some feedback then. I liked it the way it was. When a build
fails, I do a one of install of that package and I like to see the
output. Why, because sometimes it gives me a hint as to why it failed
or
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:43:36 +0100:
Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:17:28 +0100:
Here is some feedback then. I liked it the way it was. When a
build fails, I do a one of install of that package and I like to
see the
Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:43:36 +0100:
Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:17:28 +0100:
Here is some feedback then. I liked it the way it was. When a
build fails, I do a one of install of that package and I
On 11/14/2011 05:11 AM, Dale wrote:
Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:43:36 +0100:
Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote:
Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:17:28 +0100:
Here is some feedback then. I liked it the way it was. When a
build fails, I do a
On 11/14/2011 12:47 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 02:59, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well, it's much easier to gather interest and get feedback if we deploy
the change and ask questions later.
I like the new output, but find it kind of annoying that there's very
On Monday 14 November 2011 04:39:50 Patrick Lauer wrote:
Why do y'all want to make it harder for me to figure out
you've already told you how to put it into verbose mode (it's all of one line
in your make.conf). you do it once, and then you're done.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a
On 11/12/11 11:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Most devs will be unhappy as it makes it harder to view the log while
building.
We can have a different default in the developer profile.
Please consider reverting it and let users set it with
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS if they want it less noisy.
Why
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 11/12/2011 11:40 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
devs are not the normal case. it's trivial to have them use
--quiet-build=n in their default emerge opts. -mike
Or add --quiet-build=n to dev/ profiles.
- --
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo
Mike Frysinger schrieb:
On Saturday 12 November 2011 17:24:08 Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 11/11/11 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
good point. we don't want to punish old portage users. let's enable it
by default in portage itself then. just add `elog` output to the
portage ebuild to inform users of
Excerpts from Thomas Sachau's message of 2011-11-13 13:39:17 +0100:
This can be argued from either side, if the default is verbose, you
can make it quiet in the default emerge opts and the other way round.
So this is no argument for or against default quiet build in my eyes.
Not every user
Amadeusz Żołnowski schrieb:
Excerpts from Thomas Sachau's message of 2011-11-13 13:39:17 +0100:
This can be argued from either side, if the default is verbose, you
can make it quiet in the default emerge opts and the other way round.
So this is no argument for or against default quiet build in
Excerpts from Thomas Sachau's message of 2011-11-13 14:59:57 +0100:
How is that an argument for default quiet build? It is exactly the
same argument against default quiet build. If someone does not care,
he does not care about the output being verbose or not, so no need to
change a default for
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
You expect people to manually check the build.log just to see, where it
hangs? I prefer checking the
console, there i can see it directly and dont have to check for the path of
the current build.log
and then have to
Amadeusz Żołnowski schrieb:
Excerpts from Thomas Sachau's message of 2011-11-13 14:59:57 +0100:
How is that an argument for default quiet build? It is exactly the
same argument against default quiet build. If someone does not care,
he does not care about the output being verbose or not, so no
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
1. Who defines, what the default should be and when it is acceptable to force
an unknown amount of
users to change their settings?
Well, this did go on a mailing list, and so far we have all of 13
unique participants, so
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
this seems like a bit of a tempest in a teapot
It cracks me up, this colloquialism.
Please don't change this back. /$0.02
In theory, this should make Portage slightly more efficient since it
won't be performing the
On Sunday 13 November 2011 05:48:40 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
On 11/12/11 11:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Most devs will be unhappy as it makes it harder to view the log while
building.
We can have a different default in the developer profile.
the original reason for not doing this via
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 11/13/2011 04:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2011 05:48:40 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
On 11/12/11 11:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Most devs will be unhappy as it makes it harder to view the log
while building.
We can have
On 11/13/2011 11:08 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 11/13/2011 04:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2011 05:48:40 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
On 11/12/11 11:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Most devs will be unhappy as it makes it harder to view the log
while building.
We can have a
On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things (adding
quiet-build=n to the
default emerge opts or searching for and opening the build.log) and what i or
others do get from
that. And less lines on the screen is no added
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things (adding
quiet-build=n to the
default emerge opts or searching for and opening the build.log) and what i
or others do get from
that. And less lines on the
On 11/13/2011 03:09 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things
(adding quiet-build=n to the
default emerge opts or searching for and opening the build.log) and what i
or
Zac Medico schrieb:
All I have is the feedback from this mailing list, an my own intuition.
My intuition says that --quiet-build is reasonable default that the
silent majority of people will welcome.
Per discussion on IRC, I propose to make -v turn off quiet-build by default.
It can remain
On 11/13/2011 04:24 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
All I have is the feedback from this mailing list, an my own intuition.
My intuition says that --quiet-build is reasonable default that the
silent majority of people will welcome.
Per discussion on IRC, I
On 11/13/2011 04:36 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
Per discussion on IRC, I propose to make -v turn off quiet-build by default.
It can remain enabled by default if -v is not passed to emerge.
I think -v controls too many other things to make it override
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 04:36 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
Per discussion on IRC, I propose to make -v turn off quiet-build by
default.
It can remain enabled by default if -v is not passed to emerge.
I think -v controls too many other things to make
On 11/13/2011 04:45 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 04:36 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
Per discussion on IRC, I propose to make -v turn off quiet-build by
default.
It can remain enabled by default if -v is not passed
Zac Medico schrieb:
To be more explicit:
1) emerge foo: quiet build
2) emerge foo --quiet-build=n: non-quiet build
3) emerge foo -v: non-quiet build
4) emerge foo -v --quiet-build=y: quiet-build
So -v sets the default for quiet build, but user can still override with
explicit
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 03:09 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things
(adding quiet-build=n to the
default emerge opts or searching for and opening the build.log)
Thomas Sachau schrieb:
The numbers of commenting people in here are way too low to say anything,
To get more numbers, I created a forum poll as suggested by ferringb.
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-901858.html (plain)
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-901858.html (ssl)
Best
On 11/13/2011 05:27 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 03:09 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Zac Medico schrieb:
On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things
(adding quiet-build=n to the
default emerge
On 11/11/11 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
good point. we don't want to punish old portage users. let's enable it by
default in portage itself then. just add `elog` output to the portage ebuild
to inform users of the change ? or do we want a news item ?
what's the flag to negate the default ?
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 11/11/11 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
good point. we don't want to punish old portage users. let's enable it
by
default in portage itself then. just add `elog` output to the portage
ebuild
to inform users of the
On Saturday 12 November 2011 17:24:08 Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 11/11/11 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
good point. we don't want to punish old portage users. let's enable it
by default in portage itself then. just add `elog` output to the
portage ebuild to inform users of the change ? or do we
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 5:10 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 12 November 2011 17:24:08 Patrick Lauer wrote:
Lots of people in #gentoo are unhappy with it.
most changes people will be unhappy with because it's different
This is objectively true. That's why you weigh
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 12 November 2011 17:24:08 Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 11/11/11 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
good point. we don't want to punish old portage users. let's enable it
by default in portage itself then. just add
On 12 November 2011 15:40, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 12 November 2011 17:24:08 Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 11/11/11 16:44, Zac Medico wrote:
good point. we don't want to punish old portage users. let's enable it
by default in portage itself then. just add `elog`
On 11/12/2011 06:49 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins wrote:
Then why not you and the other 2 guys that approved this change here
(and are the only people I saw approving this, TBH), add
--quiet-build=y to your default emerge opts and avoid this kind of
change?
I like the new default.
Anyone
On Thursday 10 November 2011 22:23:57 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 07:17 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 06:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike
On 11/11/2011 07:11 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 22:23:57 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 07:17 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 06:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 19:09:28 Luca Barbato wrote:
On 11/5/11 1:58 AM, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
I'd like to ask that we enable verbose building by default. I have
cmake-utils.eclass in mind, because it's dead easy there, but
On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 19:09:28 Luca Barbato wrote:
On 11/5/11 1:58 AM, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
I'd like to ask that we enable verbose building by default. I have
cmake-utils.eclass
On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike Frysinger wrote:
if you want quiet portage output, use something like --quiet when
running emerge. the verbosity of the build output isn't really
On 11/10/2011 06:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike Frysinger wrote:
if you want quiet portage output, use something like --quiet when
running emerge.
On 11/10/2011 07:17 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 06:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike Frysinger wrote:
if you want quiet portage output, use
55 matches
Mail list logo
