| 1 |
Hi Daniel |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Daniel Drake wrote: |
| 4 |
> My question is, how can we improve this situation? Portage really needs |
| 5 |
> a decent messaging system to convey messages like this. It's in the |
| 6 |
> works, right? It seems long overdue now... |
| 7 |
> Users suggested making the messages appear at the very end of the emerge |
| 8 |
> process ("* X config files in /etc need updating" style), or an |
| 9 |
> etc-update style system where you read messages and dismiss them once |
| 10 |
> you've seen them, or a system which mails you those ewarn messages. |
| 11 |
> I really hope portage will be able to provide functionality something |
| 12 |
> like this soon... |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
There is a patch to make portage quiet, but most of the users |
| 15 |
complaining about Gentoo beeing 'not working anymore' probably don't |
| 16 |
know how to/want to apply such a patch. This was already discussed |
| 17 |
earlier (see [gentoo-dev] rfc: epause instead of sleep in ebuilds, |
| 18 |
09/01/04). If users would only see the einfo, ewarn, eerrors and so on, |
| 19 |
they probably would read the emerge output. Those who don't at least |
| 20 |
couldn't blame us anymore, because it's really not hard to scroll up and |
| 21 |
read. Those who don't because they're doing the emerge -u world per |
| 22 |
cronjob or so could mail these warnings themself anyway, most (all?) |
| 23 |
crons provide such a service. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> In the meantime, could we have handled this better with the resources |
| 26 |
> available to us right now? How have other people coped with similar |
| 27 |
> changes? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I don't see anything beside a new standard setting in portage. There |
| 30 |
would be solutions, but the problem is that people that would 'install' |
| 31 |
them wouldn't blame you anyway... |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
greetings |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
blubb |
Archives