From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7530 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2004 16:19:28 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 21 Jul 2004 16:19:28 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BnJoV-0004wf-GS for arch-gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:19:27 +0000 Received: (qmail 25099 invoked by uid 89); 21 Jul 2004 16:19:25 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 6314 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2004 16:19:25 +0000 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:19:20 +0200 From: Michael Kohl To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-Id: <20040721181920.1b7ebd1c@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20040721181519.649dbdd1@eusebe> References: <20040721082030.M10174@sparc20.hchs.hc.edu.tw> <20040721110404.67e944e0@localhost> <43241.66.99.246.226.1090423772.squirrel@66.99.246.226> <20040721175159.2c35401f@localhost> <20040721181519.649dbdd1@eusebe> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.11claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-Operating-System: Gentoo Linux Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="Signature=_Wed__21_Jul_2004_18_19_20_+0200_ZFlP+FmSsm3u/Tn." Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] a suggestion about einfo messages X-Archives-Salt: 24515184-c87d-4f18-a015-56c957963d32 X-Archives-Hash: 5c09c65381d033df071fc675827a1065 --Signature=_Wed__21_Jul_2004_18_19_20_+0200_ZFlP+FmSsm3u/Tn. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:15:19 +0200 Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: > Sure, that's still better than nothing, but a solution at > ebuild.sh level would be much better. True, I never wanted to argue about that. I just thought the OP might be interested in a solution for his problems that works right away, and portlog-info does that just fine, hack or not. :) Regards, Michael -- www.cargal.org GnuPG-key-ID: 0x90CA09E3 Jabber-ID: citizen428 [at] cargal [dot] org Registered Linux User #278726 --Signature=_Wed__21_Jul_2004_18_19_20_+0200_ZFlP+FmSsm3u/Tn. Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFA/peK3i2RopDKCeMRAhXpAJ48VtkKBok6tE8cTN879BXV6xXYVQCfQwBx dmTOtgh64UDiybfdvByWMKc= =rqQr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Wed__21_Jul_2004_18_19_20_+0200_ZFlP+FmSsm3u/Tn.--