Re: [gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?

[David W Noon <dwnoon@ntlworld.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1774 bytes --]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:20:02 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] what's wrong with rsync 3.0.6?:

>On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:10:41 +0000, David W Noon wrote:
>
>> > Also, for builds, there is such a
>> >thing as elogs (which allows you to save all messages to 
>> >/var/log/portage for ease of reading at your leisure.  
>> 
>> I have mine go to /var/log/portage/log.  But these only log the
>> activities within a single ebuild, not the other housekeeping that
>> goes on in an emerge job.  The output of a batch job contains the
>> lot.
>
>As do the log files in $PORT_LOGDIR, they contain exactly the same
>output you would see in the terminal.

Not quite.  The sequence in which the ebuilds were run is lost when the
discrete logs are your only source of tracing through, although one
could attempt to reconstruct it using the timestamps in the file names
of the ebuild logs. They also do not contain the results of the "pretend
depclean" that occurs at the end of an emerge job. Moreover, they do
not contain the report of the number of configuration files that need
updating by cfg-update (or the like).

>I emerge packages with the -j 2
>option, which hides all the output unless an ebuild fails, but it is
>still in the logs. Elog information is mailed to me.

I ended up switching off the emailing of ebuild logs, as it mostly
duplicates text that is already in the emerge job output.  These days,
I primarily use the ebuild logs as uploads to Gentoo's bugzilla when
there is a problem to be reported.
-- 
Regards,

Dave  [RLU #314465]
======================================================================
dwnoon@ntlworld.com (David W Noon)
======================================================================

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]