Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage log suggestion

[Brian Harring <ferringb@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1262 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 02:13:43PM +0200, Frank Schafer wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I fought with a stage1 install during this weekend. Today in the morning
> I succeeded.
> I had to move a lot in /var/log/portage.
> 
> For the content of this directory I'd suggest the following:
> 
> Remove the 4 digit number from the log file names.
They're relevant to portage stable; down the line it'll likely be 
mtime based.
Right now that 4 digit number is an internal incrementing counter 
that's tagged into the log file name.

> It is a good idea to have 2 files for each package. One with the output
> of make and one with the messages for the installer. Name the former
> package-version.log and the latter package-version.msg

Doesn't work that way, and what you're after (restating your 
'installer' as enotice/ewarn/einfo) is elog, something that'll be in 
the next major version.

You're seeing two logs due to the fact you have FEATURES="buildpkg" 
on; effectively, portage build's the binpkg (log 1), then merges it 
(log 2).  This is inneficient though, since it builds up one $IMAGE 
dir, binpkg's it, then dumps it to another dir and installs from that.

That's an old annoyance that should die a miserable death soon enough.
~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]