Re: [gentoo-user] emerge util-linx; util-linux and sysvinit block eachother.

[Alan McKinnon]

On 10/06/2014 20:29, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 19:06:19 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>>> What's not to like? Do you like a long emerge list aborting as soon as
>>> you turn your back because of a missing patch file in a minor package?
>>
>> Yes, exactly. For two reasons:
>>
>> 1. In the vast majority of cases, there's something to deal with and I
>> like to deal with it now. Missing patch files are comparatively rare for
>> me, whereas X doesn't build with the latest version of Y is somewhat
>> common. I'd rather mask the new version of Y and let portage re-figure
>> things out.
>
> Yes, but the packages that continue have nothing to do with the error, so
> it makes sense to get them out the way so only the problem packages are
> left. Also, when there's yet-another-bloody-chromium-update and I set it
> running and go to do something useful, I don't want to come back two
> hours later to find it didn't even try to build chromium because
> sys-unrelated/foo failed.
>
> Also, occasionally, I find that running the update again compiles the
> program correctly this time. This happens quite often with KDE updates
> when kdm and one or two others fail on the first pass, but work next
> time.
>
>> 2. My over-the-top OCDness won't let me leave the bloody thing alone and
>> let it finish, if I know there's an error in there I feel compelled to
>> hit Ctrl-C and find out what the error is :-)
>
> I understand that only too well, but I find it less destructive to look
> at the log for the failed build while the others continue :P
>
>


I understand you completely, and I also understand Alan completely :-)

I'm an old fart, set in my ways, I found something long ago that works
for me with unsufficient pain to provoke a change.

So I ain't changin' :-)



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com