1 |
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:20:02 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re: |
2 |
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?: |
3 |
|
4 |
>On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:10:41 +0000, David W Noon wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
>> > Also, for builds, there is such a |
7 |
>> >thing as elogs (which allows you to save all messages to |
8 |
>> >/var/log/portage for ease of reading at your leisure. |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> I have mine go to /var/log/portage/log. But these only log the |
11 |
>> activities within a single ebuild, not the other housekeeping that |
12 |
>> goes on in an emerge job. The output of a batch job contains the |
13 |
>> lot. |
14 |
> |
15 |
>As do the log files in $PORT_LOGDIR, they contain exactly the same |
16 |
>output you would see in the terminal. |
17 |
|
18 |
Not quite. The sequence in which the ebuilds were run is lost when the |
19 |
discrete logs are your only source of tracing through, although one |
20 |
could attempt to reconstruct it using the timestamps in the file names |
21 |
of the ebuild logs. They also do not contain the results of the "pretend |
22 |
depclean" that occurs at the end of an emerge job. Moreover, they do |
23 |
not contain the report of the number of configuration files that need |
24 |
updating by cfg-update (or the like). |
25 |
|
26 |
>I emerge packages with the -j 2 |
27 |
>option, which hides all the output unless an ebuild fails, but it is |
28 |
>still in the logs. Elog information is mailed to me. |
29 |
|
30 |
I ended up switching off the emailing of ebuild logs, as it mostly |
31 |
duplicates text that is already in the emerge job output. These days, |
32 |
I primarily use the ebuild logs as uploads to Gentoo's bugzilla when |
33 |
there is a problem to be reported. |
34 |
-- |
35 |
Regards, |
36 |
|
37 |
Dave [RLU #314465] |
38 |
====================================================================== |
39 |
dwnoon@××××××××.com (David W Noon) |
40 |
====================================================================== |