Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 18/01/13 03:13 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > > I wonder if anybody uses unattended [backup+]emerge as cron job. > I'm really temped to do so, but with users relying on these > machines I'm always chicken-out. > I used to, up until around 2006-200

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > >> On 01/18/2013 09:28 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: >> > but - and that's quite important i guess - i only use my own clone of >> > the portage tree which i sync from time to time and i al

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > On 01/18/2013 09:28 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > > but - and that's quite important i guess - i only use my own clone of > > the portage tree which i sync from time to time and i also keep > > different versions stable, etc. > HEAVY USER! But

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On 01/18/2013 09:28 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > i've refrained from doing unattended upgrades for a long time, but i'm > quite confident in updateworld these days and i usually test it on 2-3 > machines and then let the other 50+ machines do it unattended and it has > been working fine so far ... go

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > I wonder if anybody uses unattended [backup+]emerge as cron job. > I'm really temped to do so, but with users relying on these machines I'm > always chicken-out. > i've refrained from doing unattended upgrades for a long time, but i'm quite

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On 01/18/2013 08:36 AM, Benedikt Böhm wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Michael Weber > wrote: > I'd like to drop one strong suggestion about configuration management > that might be beneficial here: use version control software! > or even /etc/.git ... it s

Re: update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to drop one strong suggestion about configuration management > that might be beneficial here: use version control software! > > Some machines (esp. those with shared administration) have /etc/portage > under git [1] with >

update commands / world file pollution Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

Hi, I'd like to drop one strong suggestion about configuration management that might be beneficial here: use version control software! Some machines (esp. those with shared administration) have /etc/portage under git [1] with - /var/lib/portage/world symlinked to /etc/portage/world - PORTDIR_OV

[gentoo-dev] Stable sys-devel/gcc USE flag changes WAS: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: ChangeLog toolchain.eclass

Hi folks, this commit changes the set of USE flags on the just stabled gcc-4.6, running a huge number into an rebuild of an freshly updated package. (emerge --newuse recaclulates from "go disabled" to "go missing") Wouldn't it be possible to a) refrain from this change (really, who has USE=go tur