Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] qt blockages...
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:19:44
Message-Id: 497526A7.6090007@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] qt blockages... by Mark Knecht
1 Mark Knecht wrote:
2 > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote:
3 > <SNIP>
4 >
5 >> Hence the question, should this be a default option? I'm not the only
6 >> one that has ran into this.
7 >>
8 >> Dale
9 >>
10 >
11 > Maybe it's a forest for trees thing but it's in the man page and shows
12 > up early in Gentoo Portage documentation:
13 >
14 > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/faq.xml
15 >
16 > I don't think it's required for all folks so I don't think it should
17 > be default. It does result in longer emerge cycles as it grabs and
18 > builds more code on average. Many folks might not want that.
19 >
20 > Just my thoughts,
21 > Mark
22 >
23 >
24 >
25
26 It's sort of funny in a way. I hardly ever go to the Gentoo website. I
27 follow this list and -dev and learn that way. I sync usually each
28 Friday or Saturday and usually by the time I get the packages downloaded
29 over my slow dial-up, if there are any problems with something it will
30 be on the list by then. I do on occasion search the forums. I'm going
31 through the qt blockages now but I still have a lot to download yet.
32 That qt-core package is huge. Almost like OOo. Then there are the
33 brothers, sisters and children of that thing to go with it.
34
35 I need broadband something awful. I don't think sticking a stick of
36 dynamite under AT&T would do any good at all either
37
38 Dale
39
40 :-) :-)

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] qt blockages... Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com>