| 1 |
On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 23:12:15 +0300 |
| 2 |
Eldad Zack <eldad@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Basically, it could be implemented using a new eclass or just |
| 5 |
> adding the enotice function to eutils |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I don't get your point. Your solution would require patching |
| 8 |
hundreds of ebuilds, just to avoid patching portage? Imho, this is |
| 9 |
a very wrong approach. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> I wouldn't want all the einfos logged, anyway. (patching |
| 12 |
> notices? no thanks.) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Sure, but this messages are typically the ones from a few |
| 15 |
eclasses. That's the ones that should be changed (by using some |
| 16 |
variants of e{info,warn,etc.} that don't write to the log files), |
| 17 |
it would be much less work. At the contrary, I think almost all |
| 18 |
e{info,warn,etc.} from ebuilds are there to be read and should be |
| 19 |
in the logs. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
TGL. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives