On Sunday 09 October 2005 18:57, Rumen Yotov wrote:
> Hi,
> On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 18:19:50 +0000
>
> Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm getting ready to make a post on bugs.gentoo.org to ask for a
> > couple of feature enhancements for portage's emerge routine. I
> > thought I'd ask here first, to see how everyone feels about them and
> > if there's too much negative response I'll just drop the idea.
> >
> > Two new features I'd like to see added are;
> >
> > 1- In /etc/make.conf add a new key to FEATURES that would cause
> > portage to cleanup the DISTDIR folder if everything emerges cleanly.
> > Perhaps "CLEANDIST" or "DISTCLEAN" or something similar would
> > suffice. I never, ever keep the source files after a successfully
> > emerge session and it would be nice if portage would take care of the
> > dirty work for me.... automatically.
>
> Think this is already in Portage (as FEATURE) and is called
> "distclean", haven't tried it though - remove source after install.
>
Just to make sure, I looked over the man files once more time. Yes, there's an
option named NOCLEAN. It's supposed to stop tmp and source file cleanups...
Hmmm.... maybe I found a bug? Cleanups to occur in /var/tmp/portage but never
the source files in distfiles.
> > 2- We have "emerge world" that covers everything already installed
> > and "emerge sys" that covers all the system related stuff.... How
> > about "emerge apps" that would ONLY cover things NOT in "emerge
> > sys"? Face it, it'd be nice.... Right now, I have to resort to extra
> > steps to "emerge apps" and well... it'd be a nicer chore for portage
> > to handle.
>
> What about e.g."emerge -ev gnome", think this will work, specially for
> meta-packages. Tried it - too many packages, catches deps of deps etc.
>
Yeah, same here for a number of packages. "Emerge apps" would be better if
available.
> > 3- Make a list of hooks available to hackers, like myself. I know I
> > can implement the above features, but the emerge source is huge and
> > teasing out the details is proving more time consumeing than actually
> > implementing new code. Perhaps in /etc/make.conf there could be
> > config lines like, "EXECUTE_AFTER_OK_EMERGE" and we could fill in a
> > path to our own cleanup scripts... Or maybe
> > "EXECUTE_AFTER_BAD_EMERGE" in the same case as above, but after a bad
> > emerge run, etc....
> >
> >
> > So, what do you guys/gals think?
>
> HTH.Rumen
--
******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
3:33pm up 21 days, 5:58, 1 user, load average: 0.05, 0.07, 0.08
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
