| 1 |
Pavel Vondricka wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
This seems to be two front-end issues that are actually pretty different. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> Hi, |
| 6 |
> I often would like to continue with a partly done emerge (e.g. manually |
| 7 |
> interrupted compilation or compile failure -because of some stupid USE flag |
| 8 |
> setting, aso.), without emerge starting from the scratch again. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
The first is that you want an emerge to be a "transaction", and if it's |
| 11 |
interrupted you want to be able to resume the transction where you left |
| 12 |
off (particularly if you haven't done a different emerge immediately |
| 13 |
before). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> It is not only "a bad dream at the end of a 12-hour compilation", but I'd also |
| 16 |
> like to just unpack the sources, stop emerge, edit/patch the sources |
| 17 |
> manually, and then let emerge continue and compile and install it, sometimes. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
And this is the second issue, that you'd be happy with something like |
| 20 |
PORTAGE_BREAKPOINT="kde-base/kdebase-3.2:compile", and the front-end |
| 21 |
sending itself a SIGSTOP just before that stage, so you could patch kde |
| 22 |
and then `fg` to resume it. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> Is it possible with the current emerge or will it be possible with the future |
| 25 |
> portage-ng? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
They're both possible now, but it would be interesting to have emerge be |
| 28 |
a bit cleverer about it (afaik neither of these operations are possible |
| 29 |
with emerge, only with ebuild). |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Let me know if I've got the wrong end of the stick. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives