From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11666 invoked by uid 1002); 12 Apr 2003 22:05:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 410 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2003 22:05:33 -0000 Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 23:05:31 +0100 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030412220531.GA7431@mars.leahcim.invalid> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <1050174571.1279.17.camel@blafasel> <200304121524.19816.brian@mdrx.com> <1050179520.1274.24.camel@blafasel> <20030412204540.GA5108@cherenkov.orbis-terrarum.net> <1050184000.1273.32.camel@blafasel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1050184000.1273.32.camel@blafasel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i From: leahcim@ntlworld.com Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Performance once again.. X-Archives-Salt: c96bb101-7748-4a1e-9ab4-16fc17bdd8e4 X-Archives-Hash: a62c00aa51a227ed0b3cd9b3dee5deae On Sat, Apr 12, 2003 at 11:46:40PM +0200, Benjamin Podszun wrote: > Well, that's an ugly hack.. Yes, thanks for the hint, but I already > thought about something like this.. And I don't think that it solves a > single problem, nor is it a suitable solution on a (I love this word) > production environment. It's two words. You should get to like "testing environment" just as much :o) The best recommendation is to (a) get a system in a testing environment to sort out what the problem is without the emotive comments (b) roll back to your previous working environment and (c) promote those responsible to middle management ;) -- Michael. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list