1 |
On 05/01/2013 02:42 PM, James Cloos wrote: |
2 |
>>>>>> "ZM" == Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> writes: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> ZM> That commit allows backtracking to continue in the event that unsolved |
5 |
> ZM> blockers are encountered, solving this bug: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> ZM> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=465638 |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I read the bug. But it was the only commit that at first glance *could* |
10 |
> have been the issue. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> ZM> That means that emerge may spend some more time backtracking in some |
13 |
> ZM> cases involving blockers, even though the backtracking may not |
14 |
> ZM> ultimately lead to a useful solution. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Five hours more, in my case. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> ZM> Did your test case involve blockers? Are you using the --backtrack |
19 |
> ZM> option to increase the amount of backtracking that is allowed? |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Yes. There are several blockers and at some point in the fuzzy past I |
22 |
> added --backtrack=30 to get around some issue which was preventing the |
23 |
> automated sync && pv from reporting any possible updates. |
24 |
|
25 |
Okay, then I'd suggest to use a lower --backtrack setting (10 is |
26 |
default), at least until you decide how you are going to resolve the |
27 |
blockers. |
28 |
-- |
29 |
Thanks, |
30 |
Zac |