Summary: | emerge needs continue/ignore options | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Robert Bradbury <robert.bradbury> |
Component: | Core - Interface (emerge) | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | enhancement | CC: | alex_y_xu |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
URL: | N/A | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Robert Bradbury
2010-05-31 12:36:14 UTC
What's wrong with the --resume and --keep-going options? Okay, scratch my previous comment (I should really stop commenting bugs when I'm very tired). Fact is, your idea of --continue would be hard to implement as emerge would never knew in which state the extracted source is. I personally would refuse a bug report when I'd know a user did some changes and then running --continue to just stumbling over another (user caused?) error. It's similar with your idea of --ignore. When make emits an error in most cases it is one that should be fixed rather than ignoring it. What do you think would be the first advices in the forums when these features would be implemented? And don't get me started about the moaners that would then blame us for writing/committing crappy ebuilds. I'm sure your suggestion is with good intentions in mind but I see too much potential for abuse of these features. FEATURES=keepwork, DO NOT SUBMIT BUGS IF YOU HAVE ENABLED THIS. |