| 1 |
On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 17:38 +0100, Johannes Fahrenkrug wrote: |
| 2 |
> Good point. Is this patch better? Or should it rather be _exactly_ as it |
| 3 |
> is in revdep-rebuild? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I personally would do it the same way as revdep-rebuild since that |
| 6 |
causes the entire script and anything it calls to be run at the value |
| 7 |
set in PORTAGE_NICENESS. However, the way you have done it works just as |
| 8 |
well. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
As far as your patch goes, you don't need to call the emerge metadata |
| 11 |
with a nice value since the emerge command reads and uses the |
| 12 |
PORTAGE_NICENESS value. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Finally, I am not a portage developer, so if this gets accepted and used |
| 15 |
depends upon them and not me. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Regards, |
| 18 |
Paul |
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives