From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1PJKXt-0006qL-DW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:34:05 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A63FE079B; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:33:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3052E079B for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:33:04 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmUKADKp5UzO+LM//2dsb2JhbACUV40Ge3K8W4VLBIRaiReETA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,221,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="82956135" Received: from 206-248-179-63.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO waltdnes.org) ([206.248.179.63]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with SMTP; 19 Nov 2010 01:32:56 -0500 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 19 Nov 2010 01:34:15 -0500 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 01:34:15 -0500 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] One machine sends "emerge" text output to stderr, not stdout Message-ID: <20101119063415.GE32524@waltdnes.org> References: <20101117002517.GA18328@waltdnes.org> <20101118002025.GA23732@waltdnes.org> <20101118112133.45a5c999@digimed.co.uk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101118112133.45a5c999@digimed.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: 7214370a-1cfc-48a3-aa6c-6a339986b4f1 X-Archives-Hash: cdcf919f6c69d9752fa13d38ef16f2b9 On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:21:33AM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote > Blaming the devs for your broken modem/router is rather unfair. If > you'd known it was unable to handle IPv6 correctly, why didn't you > set the flag accordingly? My ISP didn't support ipv6 at that time. They're now running a beta for native ipv6 (no tunneling) but I don't have the time to play with bleeding edge stuff. Regardless of the fact that my router/modem does or does not support ipv6, if I don't have ipv6 service from my ISP (or a tunnel broker) ipv6 is pointless. > If you didn't know, HTH were the devs supposed to know? The devs *CHANGED AN EXISTING DEFAULT FLAG* from -ipv6 to ipv6. What percentage of the user base was running ipv6 a couple of years ago? Why couldn't they have left the default at -ipv6? Ever heard of "the principle of least surprise" aka "the principle of least astonishment"? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment Unnecessarily changing defaults violates that principle in the worst way. There's an old saying... * good judgement is the result of experience * experience is the result of bad judgement As a result of my "experience" with the ipv6 flag, I no longer robo-update. Note that in the first post of this thread, I said... > I normally... > > emerge -pv --deep --update world | less > > ...before updating, to check for booby-traps. So you see, I did learn from my "experience". I do check for stuff like this now. As an additional safety measure, I also begin the USE variable with "-*". -- Walter Dnes