1 |
On Thursday 20 December 2007 02:46:20 Iain Buchanan wrote: |
2 |
> > And the recent addition of the option '--continue-on-failure' won me |
3 |
> > over all over again. :) |
4 |
> |
5 |
> I've been wondering for a long time why portage doesn't continue with |
6 |
> building other packages when one fails - so long as deps are met why |
7 |
> stop? |
8 |
|
9 |
Because the current resolver in Portage isn't powerfull enough to know if the |
10 |
deps are met. |
11 |
|
12 |
> Acutally, while I'm on the subject of features - here's another one I'd |
13 |
> like to see: parallel merges instead of parallel makes. |
14 |
|
15 |
It's planned (both for Portage and Paludis). For Portage there's even a bug |
16 |
with a patch which isn't considered suitable for inclusion in Portage. |
17 |
|
18 |
-- |
19 |
Bo Andresen |