On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 13:55 +0200, Frank Schafer wrote:
So genlop isn't a reason to not change the names of the log files, is
it?
Point taken (in fact i didn't know genlop got its stats
from /var/log/emerge.log, i thought it got them from /var/log/portage/*
I suggest that you submit a bug at
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 11:20:30 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
It does provide some useful functionality IMHO, (and obviously in the
NSHO of the designer of the logging system.)
I quite _like_ to see when i first installed mplayer, what versions i
had installed at certain times, how long it will take
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 11:20 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 13:38:41 +0200
Frank Schafer wrote:
There shouldn't be more logs than we have actually packages installed.
The log for the installation of the version of (say) python I had
installed 3 years ago isn't worth anything.
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:59:53 +0200, Frank Schafer wrote:
O.K. if you want to se all of this fo years, maybe you're glad enough to
own a n at least some TB disk array. ;)
After emerging of a minimal system (91 packages during semrge system)
the content of /var/log/portage takes 250MB.
Which
On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 12:31 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:59:53 +0200, Frank Schafer wrote:
O.K. if you want to se all of this fo years, maybe you're glad enough to
own a n at least some TB disk array. ;)
After emerging of a minimal system (91 packages during semrge
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 16:18 +0800, Ow Mun Heng wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Frank Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm wondering why there are these 4 digit numbers in front of the name
of each log file. This makes it hard to find the log for a single
package by name.
I
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:02:21 +0200, Frank Schafer wrote:
I'm wondering why there are these 4 digit numbers in front of the name
of each log file. This makes it hard to find the log for a single
package by name.
Maybe some internal feature of portage?
What about changing the logfile names
Neil Bothwick wrote:
I like the idea of giving the two logs different names, it would make
parsing this information with a script much easier. You'd still need some
sort of unique identifier in the names, because you could merge the same
package version more than once. But naming the files .log
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 09:37 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:02:21 +0200, Frank Schafer wrote:
I'm wondering why there are these 4 digit numbers in front of the name
of each log file. This makes it hard to find the log for a single
package by name.
Maybe some internal
On Mon, September 12, 2005 8:02 pm, Frank Schafer said:
Hi list,
I'm just wondering about the manner portage manages it log files.
It's a very good idea to have 2 logs for each package (one with each end
every line of the make output and one with the messages of the package
for the
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:25 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September 12, 2005 8:02 pm, Frank Schafer said:
Hi list,
I'm just wondering about the manner portage manages it log files.
It's a very good idea to have 2 logs for each package (one with each end
every line of the make output
On Mon, September 12, 2005 9:35 pm, Frank Schafer said:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:25 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September 12, 2005 8:02 pm, Frank Schafer said:
I'm wondering why there are these 4 digit numbers in front of the name
of each log file. This makes it hard to find the log for
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:55 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September 12, 2005 9:35 pm, Frank Schafer said:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:25 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September 12, 2005 8:02 pm, Frank Schafer said:
I'm wondering why there are these 4 digit numbers in front of the name
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 22:59 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September 12, 2005 10:24 pm, Frank Schafer said:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:55 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September 12, 2005 9:35 pm, Frank Schafer said:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 21:25 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, September
What about changing the logfile names to:
package-version.log
package-version.msg?
Because multiple installs of the same version would overwrite the log. The
added prefix is, I believe, either some sort of order number or a time-based
reference, not sure which.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 13:38:41 +0200
Frank Schafer wrote:
There shouldn't be more logs than we have actually packages installed.
The log for the installation of the version of (say) python I had
installed 3 years ago isn't worth anything. (Me to say) A successful
installation of a new version
16 matches
Mail list logo
