| 1 |
On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 16:25, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 17 September 2004 08:02, Brian wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > Is there a simple method/function call to reset portage to use the new |
| 5 |
> > changes. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> reload(portage) |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Note that this is relatively heavy as everything is reinitialized, so try to |
| 10 |
> do it as little as possible. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Regards, |
| 13 |
> Jason Stubbs |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 16:30, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Does `reload(portage)` work ? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Marius |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Yes that does the trick. Thank you. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I didn't know if there was an internal portage module that could reload /etc/make.conf. |
| 25 |
It did not seem to slow a reload down too much on my system but I imagine it could for |
| 26 |
some of the older slower machines. Now I'll have to come up with a method for plugins |
| 27 |
to interface with porthole. Hopefully Dan will be back in operation soon so we can set up |
| 28 |
a good plan of attack. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Also, while I've got your attention. I was experimenting with some things and noticed that |
| 32 |
when I had temporarily renamed /etc/portage/package.keywords, porthole seemed to reload the |
| 33 |
upgrades list in less than half the time. Is there any plan or thoughts to cache the file |
| 34 |
(if it isn't already) to speed things up, or is it something unavoidable. |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Brian <dol-sen@×××××.net> |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives