| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
felix@×××××××.com wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:13:16AM -0400, Jason Cipriani wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> What I would like to see is a command line option to emerge that enables the |
| 8 |
>> following simple behavior: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Pardon me if I am wrong, but I want this too, and to me the simplest |
| 11 |
> analogy is to make. If some targets fail, make keeps on building the |
| 12 |
> ones it can, until it is left with no buildable targets. I too have |
| 13 |
> developed a wrapper using --resume --skipfirst, but that feels like a |
| 14 |
> kluge. What I would like is an emerge option to generate a Makefile |
| 15 |
> for output (-M looks available on a quick man check). Then instead of |
| 16 |
> emerge -ptuvDN, I would use -MtuvDN, and run make at my leisure. I am |
| 17 |
> incredibly naive about the inner workings of portage, but since it has |
| 18 |
> dependencies, it does not seem entirely farfetched to generate a Makefile. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Why not just take the features from make and add them to portage |
| 22 |
itself? That way you can just treat the portage configurations as |
| 23 |
the "Makefile". |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Zac |
| 26 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 27 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkhLNeIACgkQ/ejvha5XGaP+rgCfaBPJpBwYy8kB68jIX0rkSmzN |
| 30 |
zX0An2JlRjd7Bah0ZtTBNMftEAE/jq+H |
| 31 |
=8OeD |
| 32 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives