| 1 |
On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:48:42 -0700 |
| 2 |
Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 09/23/2015 02:58 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 5 |
> > OK, looks good |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Thanks. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > I suppose we'll need to do another release soon, but how long |
| 11 |
> > should we wait...(new repoman code) or should we just patch 2.2.21 |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Well, you ran repoman on the whole tree and compared the output to the |
| 14 |
> old version, right? Did you find any problems there? If not, and long |
| 15 |
> as you've tested it with a few commits, I'd say that's enough to |
| 16 |
> testing to release it. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> So, I think we're ready to cut a new release as soon as we have the |
| 19 |
> "portage-2.2.21 ignores PORTAGE_RSYNC_EXTRA_OPTS" bug fixed: |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=561240 |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
well, I had the terminal set for 40,000 lines of scrollback but that |
| 24 |
wasn't enough. I know, I should have redirected the output to a file |
| 25 |
It also took about 4 hours... It did complete with out any tracebacks. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I'll set it up to do simultaneous runs tonight. It certainly didn't tax |
| 28 |
this system for cpu power or memory... I suppose it'll put the zfs |
| 29 |
caching to the test too :) And compare the results tomorrow. |
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen> |
Archives