First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 58195
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: DUPLICATE of bug 151113
Assigned To: Portage team <dev-portage@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Jason Faulkner <jason@oldos.org>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 58195 depends on: Show dependency tree
Bug 58195 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2004-07-24 08:42 0000
For people who want to do things like full emptytrees to upgrade USE
flags/CFLAGS, I suggest a 'no user intervention' option to emerge. This would
automatically skip any packages (and their reverse deps) which require user
intervention to emerge.

This would avoid the issue such as, starting an emptytree, going to bed, then
waking up to find it 10 packages later waiting at an EULA prompt.

------- Comment #1 From Thomas Matthijs (RETIRED) 2004-07-24 08:57:25 0000 -------
user intervention should never be required
if a packages does, it's a bug, file a bug against the pacakge that does

------- Comment #2 From Jason Stubbs (RETIRED) 2004-07-24 08:59:43 0000 -------
What you're after is a combination of bug #17367 and another one which I can't
seem to find at the moment. This functionality will be available in a month or
two.

------- Comment #3 From Jason Faulkner 2004-07-24 09:12:47 0000 -------
Several packages require acceptance of an EULA or have fetch restrictions and
will stop a emerge -e world dead in it's tracks until the user intervenes.

------- Comment #4 From Matan Peled 2004-07-24 09:42:26 0000 -------
Jstubbs:

No, he isn't looking for a variable, just for a --dont-bother-me (well, better named) switch that will avoid packages that need me to do something for them.

------- Comment #5 From Jason Faulkner 2004-07-24 09:57:39 0000 -------
Comment #4 is a perfect description of what I want, although the other bugs
look interesting.

But even if we did the other two RFEs, we'd still end up with the problem of
'F' packages stopping the process.

------- Comment #6 From Jason Stubbs (RETIRED) 2004-07-24 17:35:55 0000 -------
I realize that and already have that feature working with portage locally. I
was saying that it'll be a month or two before it's available.

------- Comment #7 From Chris White (RETIRED) 2004-07-30 11:02:19 0000 -------
*** Bug 58914 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #8 From Jason Pfingstmann 2004-07-31 06:10:00 0000 -------
Actually, even just a "bug me about problems BEFORE we start" option would be
enough (at least for me).  So if half way down there is a fetch restriction, it
warns about this and tells you WHAT the fetch restriction is and gives you the
option to resolve it before you even start.  I hate doing an emerge -Du world
just to have to come back to a screen waiting for me to continue after getting
j2sdk docs or something.

------- Comment #9 From Simon Stelling (RETIRED) 2006-04-05 14:13:05 0000 -------
Marking this as dupe of 17367 since this problem will be solved for the EULA
issue once ACCEPT_LICENSE is implemented. We can't fix fetch restriction anyway
(it's a feature, not a bug! ;)). For any other package, user interaction during
the emerge is a bug specific to that ebuild and should be filed seperately. 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17367 ***

------- Comment #10 From Matan Peled 2006-04-07 07:59:29 0000 -------
Um, no, that isn't what this bug is requesting.

Instead, it wants packages with fetch restrictions to be more verbose up front,
meaning at the time when you run 'emerge -uD world', and yell about it then, or
perhaps simply get on with it. This isn't a dup, really.

------- Comment #11 From Simon Stelling (RETIRED) 2006-04-07 08:03:19 0000 -------
right, thanks for clarifying :)

------- Comment #12 From Zac Medico 2006-06-17 09:26:31 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> it wants packages with fetch restrictions to be more verbose up front,

That does not match comment #0. Please, lets just address one feature per bug.

------- Comment #13 From Matan Peled 2006-06-17 10:13:53 0000 -------
No, piping yes into stdin won't do either.

Something needs to be done for fetch-restricted packages, too, and emerge just
dies with those and not display a [yes/no] prompt.

------- Comment #14 From Zac Medico 2006-06-17 10:34:13 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #13)
> No, piping yes into stdin won't do either.
> 
> Something needs to be done for fetch-restricted packages, too, and emerge just
> dies with those and not display a [yes/no] prompt.
> 

Only one feature request per bug please!

------- Comment #15 From Marius Mauch (RETIRED) 2007-01-10 06:44:34 0000 -------
This will be covered by RESTRICT=unattended

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 151113 ***

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug