On 11/14/2011 05:11 AM, Dale wrote: > Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: >> Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:43:36 +0100: >>> Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: >>>> Excerpts from Dale's message of 2011-11-14 13:17:28 +0100: >>>>> Here is some feedback then. I liked it the way it was. When a >>>>> build fails, I do a one of install of that package and I like to >>>>> see the output. Why, because sometimes it gives me a hint as to >>>>> why it failed or something I can google for. >>>> If it fails you get tail of build.log, so you see it anyway. >>> That doesn't always go back far enough tho. I have on my new rig seen >>> the failure be as far back as a couple hundred lines. >> Well, don't say that if problem is hundreds lines back you search it in >> that output. I'd use for that purpose "less build.log" anyway. >> >> > > If emerge puts it on the screen like it always has, I won't need to go > to any build.log. It will be there on the screen already since I have > history set to save everything.
This is already the case with --quiet-build. In the event of a build failure, emerge dumps the *entire* log to the terminal. So, the above dialog is discussing a problem that doesn't even exist. -- Thanks, Zac
