Re: [gentoo-user] Options for "emerge"

[Dale]

Dr Rainer Woitok wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> some time back it was pointed out on this list  to only use  "--changed-
> use" rather than "--newuse".  So I've meanwhile removed this option (and
> also a few others) from my update script which I had created early after
> installing Gentoo. It now basically runs
>
>    $ sudo emerge --ask --verbose-conflicts --changed-deps \
>                  --changed-use --deep --update @world
>
> But if I understand the "emerge" manual page correctly, "--changed-deps"
> causes a rebuild of a package,  if one of its  dependencies has been re-
> build, even though the package does not require the newer version of the
> dependency.  So does it really make sense  to have this option hardcoded
> in a script?   Or does it just cause  plenty of package rebuilds without
> any real effect?  Likewise, what about "--deep"?  Should I keep it?
>
> Sincerely,
>   Rainer
>
>


I been using Gentoo since about 2003.  Over the years, I've learned what
gives the most stable system even if it requires rebuilding packages as
a extra step.  I have some options in make.conf, such as --oneshot which
keeps a clean world file, so I don't always have to do a lot of typing. 
I copied this from the emerge.log so it gives a complete output of
options when I do a world update. 


emerge --newuse --oneshot --unordered-display --update --ask
--backtrack=100 --deep --keep-going --with-bdeps=y --quiet-build=y
--regex-search-auto=y --verbose world


On occasion, I have to increase backtrack but about 99% of the time, 100
is enough.  When I run into problems I can't seem to get through any
other way, I tend to do a emerge -e world.  Just in the last week or so,
I ran into a USE flag problem that sent me in circles.  After a while, I
just did a emerge -e world and emerge was able to find a path that
allowed me to get everything up to date and reinstall some packages I
had removed, trying to get a clean output.  I was then able to run
--depclean which removed several packages. 

One thing I've learned, shortcuts sometimes cause problems.  A program
may crash, be slow or do other strange things.  Over the years, I've
found that weekly updates are easier than monthly.  Over time, I've
found that the options I use give me a really stable system.  Sometimes
my uptimes are months to almost a year on occasion.  My biggest reason
for rebooting, power failure.  I'm also bad to stay logged in and keep
programs running until my weekly updates are done.  I logout, restart
services until things are reloaded with new versions and then log back
in.  I don't do a lot of logouts and back ins.

How you do things really depends on what you want in the end.  If you
really want a rock solid system, it may require rebuilding more packages
than doing things a easy and fast way.  In most cases, the fast and easy
way may work fine.  There will likely be exceptions to that rule tho. 

If you are on a laptop or a system that has less than great cooling,
that raises a whole new way of viewing things.  I wouldn't do updates on
a laptop the way I do on this desktop.  I have massive cooling on this
system with my CPU rarely reaching 125F when all cores are at 100%, such
as compiling gcc, libreoffice, Firefox etc.  I don't mind pushing this
thing a bit because the chance of overheating is basically zero. I have
a older Cooler Master HAF-932 case with all fans installed and running. 
Large CPU cooler to.  Dang thing barely fits in this large case.

Others have given some good options.  They may work better depending on
your situation.  Then again, you may like part of mine or all of mine. 
Just pick and chose what you like best. 

Hope that helps.

Dale

:-)  :-)