Summary: | portage logs some sequential merges into the same logfile | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Robin Johnson <robbat2> |
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | Keywords: | InVCS |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 2.1 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 115839 |
Description
Robin Johnson
2006-06-06 21:16:32 UTC
This is fixed in svn r3464. why is this # based on something that has no real meaning to a user ? what about something *useful* like: yyyy-mm-dd-<tick>-PF.log Maybe some third party tools require the current naming scheme? The mtime on the file itself has the date anyway.... (In reply to comment #3) > Maybe some third party tools require the current naming scheme? The mtime on > the file itself has the date anyway.... > While i think changing the filename for 2.1 stable is bad idea for the reason stated above, the tick value is useless to anyone actually *looking* at the logfiles. I'd prefer a date format myself, I'm not going to sit there and stat all the files to figure out which one to read ;) This has been released in 2.1_rc4-r4. |