| 1 |
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2010-04-12 11:05 AM, Paul Hartman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I use the --keep-going always, it was a great addition and especially |
| 4 |
>> helpful when there is a bad package that won't compile for a week or |
| 5 |
>> two, it makes it easier to just ignore it. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Hopefully no one will mind a slight OT question, but still related... |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Is the testing version of portage 2.2 stable enough for production |
| 10 |
> machines? There are a number of new features I'd like to take advantage |
| 11 |
> of, but have always hesitated to and any non-stable system packages. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I've been using portage unmasked for a very long time and don't |
| 14 |
remember having any portage-related problems. I'm sure there must be |
| 15 |
some (or else why is it still RC?) but for me the new features are |
| 16 |
worth the potential risk of using less-tested code. |
Archives