| 1 |
On Thursday 20 December 2007 02:46:20 Iain Buchanan wrote: |
| 2 |
> > And the recent addition of the option '--continue-on-failure' won me |
| 3 |
> > over all over again. :) |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I've been wondering for a long time why portage doesn't continue with |
| 6 |
> building other packages when one fails - so long as deps are met why |
| 7 |
> stop? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Because the current resolver in Portage isn't powerfull enough to know if the |
| 10 |
deps are met. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> Acutally, while I'm on the subject of features - here's another one I'd |
| 13 |
> like to see: parallel merges instead of parallel makes. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
It's planned (both for Portage and Paludis). For Portage there's even a bug |
| 16 |
with a patch which isn't considered suitable for inclusion in Portage. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Bo Andresen |
Archives