| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Show or hide build output by default? |
| emerge should hide build output by default (unless --quiet-build=n) |
|
28% |
[ 135 ] |
| emerge should show build output by default (unless --quiet-build=y) |
|
51% |
[ 240 ] |
| The -v option should control whether build output is shown or not by default |
|
17% |
[ 81 ] |
| Other (please comment) |
|
2% |
[ 10 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 466 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Mac Tzu
n00b
Joined: 13 May 2007
Posts: 44
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Well for my 2 cents,
I have voted for Other. Since there is a fairly robust post for both sides of the argument. Why not make the output a option in make.conf so that every user makes a choice on their system for their needs/wants in same why that portage niceness is handled. Then user is not require to parse long command in terminal to get what they want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
zmedico
Developer
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 352
Location: California USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mac Tzu wrote: | Well for my 2 cents,
I have voted for Other. Since there is a fairly robust post for both sides of the argument. Why not make the output a option in make.conf so that every user makes a choice on their system for their needs/wants in same why that portage niceness is handled. Then user is not require to parse long command in terminal to get what they want. |
In case you didn't know, you can change it back to the old default like this:
| Code: | | echo "EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=\"\${EMERGE_DEFAUT_OPTS} --quiet-build=n\"" >> /etc/make.conf |
_________________
Zac |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kollin
Veteran
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 1139
Location: Sofia/Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't it time to put this thread to sleep? 
_________________
"Dear Enemy: may the Lord hate you and all your kind, may you be turned orange in hue, and may your head fall off at an awkward moment."
"Linux is like a wigwam - no windows, no gates, apache inside..." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zmedico wrote: |
I don't understand what's dangerous about the new quiet default. Can you explain? |
Sure, i remember my first time experience with gentoo and the promises behind it
- custom :
when building program it was said any change i was doing was affecting my system, and changing some value even dangerous was upto me, and you just see it in 1s, "emerge that", change cflags, "emerge that" : wow gentoo doesn't cheat, i see on my screen the "that" program is now building with the new cflags i've set.
- Learning linux :
Seeing the compile output gave me knowledge of tools like gcc, glibc, libtool, make...
Even i don't "know" gcc... I could clearly see what is gcc, when it is use, for what it is use... Those are words people using gentoo handle fast, and seeing them in context help anyone getting that knowledge. If you hide output to new user, then you could lower or gave the impression to the user that he doesn't learn anything a binary distro couldn't teach him too.
It's something that might appears strange to a dev, but not all users are devs, and you might forget "common" user doesn't know at first what are these tools.
Seeing the compile process just make user get familiar fast with common linux tools, just look in the forum, how many gentoo ask something and when an answer came with "you need gcc version 4.3 to do that", how many of them answer : "what is gcc?"
- Time relationship :
With a binary distro you can have bars to see your progress to install something or a timed value, but gentoo cannot really do that in a reliable way, and portage doesn't try to do that anyway (even genlop or other solution exist).
So the only relation a user have with time is a feeling of time passing, by seeing the build process on screen, removing that, you simply deny user any chance to have a timeable value, leaving the user with no time index at all and stuck with "emerge that" on screen until end. When someone first build openoffice, you can even see some users coming to query if it's normal to wait that much. But because of the compile output on their screen, most (if not all) of them never stop the process even they have the feeling it's so long that it might not be normal. They don't doubt portage is working as they see it working and don't break the process. Because even they doubt the time taken is too long, they know the time already taken was to work and not lost, hence the "i think it's too long, but it seems to work" kind of thread.
And that's dangerous, really, binary distro will show emerging of package with a time value and progress bar, and even they need 1 hour to install something (and that's not a serious example to speak about hours to install a binary package), the user will have a clue of its end.
While with default value to hide output, a new gentoo user could get stucks minutes, hours or even days with a "emerging that" on screen, it's his first steps in gentoo, and it appears that portage is stuck and isn't doing anything. The user don't know what is going on, why it take this long, when this will end, and it seems portage isn't working at all and the user is waiting for nothing in an infinite loop.
At this point many users might just give up because they think they didn't do something right and portage isn't working, and nothing (for a new user coming with binary distro experience this mean : reinstalling again the system from step 0) they have tried unstuck portage. That thing is simply not working.
What a nice experience installing gentoo gave them : reading a doc blindly with plenty words they never seen, libtool, gcc... Trying to follow it just to see that thing is stuck when they try to install one program ! Breaking it, redo, stuck, re-install, re-emerge, damn still get stuck !
It's like seeing a counter on screen, even you see only some numbers climbing without knowing at what number the end will come, your perception of time is not the same as seeing nothing on the screen, because you see the counter climbling, you have a clue of time elaspse, lol even it's not a promise you won't be stuck for days, it gave you a feeling it's still going on and the waiting appears shorter (just turn off your TV and wait 1 minute, you'll see it appers far longer than seeing a watch counting a minute on screen). If it goes beyong your patience, you get off and do something else, and you can come back to see if the numbers are still climbing, while the "nothing on screen" version, you will get the stuck impression and want to give up.
| zmedico wrote: | | it sometimes seems as though people blame me for it, as if I acted alone. |
That's why i was worried you might take it as a personal attack, i suggest the Council, as this will imply more than one user at work, lowering the "you're our target" effect this thread might put on you. Note that i have suggest that because i think the Council should think about what possible bad effects that new default might does to gentoo new users experience and so Gentoo itself. Even knowing that the Council is form with devs, and even some of them have already agree with that change or even query that change, but i do hope they will think about the issue now not with their dev role or personal taste in mind, but their Council member role in mind -> Not thinking what would be best for devs or users, but what would be best for gentoo the distro.
I'm not sure that new default will harm gentoo, but i'm a bit worried as i see a possible bad effect on new user considering how i had experience gentoo myself, so i couldn't really think i'm right to think that, but i think i might not be wrong and this should be dig a bit.
If you reallly wish to know what i think about the new default, i just don't really care, i have the switch to turn it off or on, and i use --jobs on all my computer, i will turn back the old behavior for praticle reason for me, sometimes testing a program, and on screen you could see the named of tools install by the program, as example, but i think many exist, how many users know update-pciids came with pciutils ? Or just because i'm lazzy to cat the build.log and prefer just look at the info on screen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zmedico
Developer
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 352
Location: California USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | If you reallly wish to know what i think about the new default, i just don't really care, i have the switch to turn it off or on, and i use --jobs on all my computer, i will turn back the old behavior for praticle reason for me, sometimes testing a program, and on screen you could see the named of tools install by the program, as example, but i think many exist, how many users know update-pciids came with pciutils ? Or just because i'm lazzy to cat the build.log and prefer just look at the info on screen. |
You raise a lot of interesting points. Thanks for sharing them.
_________________
Zac |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trog Dog
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Aug 2007
Posts: 282
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: |
Sure, i remember my first time experience with gentoo and the promises behind it
|
+1 krinn
I agree with everything you say. I voted for the default being show the output, and stated my reason being to keep noobs informed of whats happening and to let them see exactly what their system is doing - really, actually building their os from the source code. It's even worse if the noob has limiited or no linux experience but plenty of windows experience - the default practice in windows is to reboot - reboot to complete an install, reboot to fix a problem - exactly the wrong thing to do part way through an emerge, or worse an initial install.
The fact that you can now turn off the output is great - that's the Gentoo way - you have the choice, but the default should be that it's enabled and then you turn it off when you have decided you don't need it. Think of it like an apprenticeship, as the apprentice you get do to do all sorts of boring and menial tasks, but they provide you with the grounding in the trade - why things are done, how things work, etc. once you are the tradesman you can choose to skip or cut steps - but as a tradesman that's your choice - and you have to live with the consequences (good or bad).
Likewise as a noob - you should be exposed to the output, you learn what's going on with your system, what this process of compiling is all about - because unless you are a programmer - you have no idea what compiling is all about. Once you've become experienced, learned how to RTFM, edit config files, etc you will have worked out that there exists an option to turn off that output if you don't like it.
Please devs consider the position of coming to this distro with no programming experience and little or no linux experience, while all that ouput whizzing by may be daunting at least you know something is happening, and after a few emerges it becomes less daunting, until you get to the point where it actually becomes comfortable - you know what's going on with a build and why.
If looked at from this point of view the default behaviour should be to show output with an EINFO message on upgrading portage that this ouptut can be turned off, that way those with the knowledge and understanding are able to turn it off and those that are yet to acquire this knowledge will be no worse off.
_________________
CIC1=CC=C(C2=N[C@@H](CC(OC(C)(C)C)=O)C3=NN=C(C)N3C4=C2C(C)=C(C)S4)C=C1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah; what Trog Dog and others have said. It's part of the initiation afaic: it lets newbies see exactly what is going on, so that they can immediately see that portage builds everything from source. Documenting setting the option in make.conf would fit in easily to the install handbooks, say at the end of Chapter 9, and then they'd have seen the initial noisy build, and would appreciate the difference, as well as being aware of both EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS and the ability to turn the option off when needed. (That might also be a good time to mention --jobs, if I haven't missed it elsewhere; it's been a while since I looked at the install docs.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randy Andy
Veteran
Joined: 19 Jun 2007
Posts: 1148
Location: /dev/koelsch
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you krinn,
for taking my recurring thoughts since this thread exist and putting it in the right form.
I'm not able to do it as well, cause I'm no native and my English is not as good, to explain it detailed enough like you did. But the meaning of my comments should point to the same direction.
Zmedico,
these arguments are not named the first time here, but now more detailed as before. So possibly you doesn't understood its meaning before.
| zmedico wrote: | | You raise a lot of interesting points. Thanks for sharing them. |
So my hope is, that you know now what we try to tell you since 8 pages of discussion, and that you are willing to respect it in the right way, the way of a Gentoo beginner.
So lets hope, that the Council and you are able to to put yourself in the position of a Gentoo Newbee, which seems so hard to remember.
This point of view is a precondition to take the best decision for this distribution.
I could imagine it must be hard for you, to take back the changes, cause you invested a lot of hard and good work into developing this functions, and you want to let the users see it now.
But this function should not be the default setting, especially not for the stable arch which you obviously plan to distribute for the future.
So please, try to respect and understand our arguments, cause we want to do whats best for Gentoo.
Our reasons are not driven by nostalgic or cause we don't like to change anything.
Regards, Andy.
_________________
If you want to see a Distro done right, compile it yourself! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1118
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | - custom :
when building program it was said any change i was doing was affecting my system, and changing some value even dangerous was upto me, and you just see it in 1s, "emerge that", change cflags, "emerge that" : wow gentoo doesn't cheat, i see on my screen the "that" program is now building with the new cflags i've set. |
See what? TTYs don't use dot matrix printers anymore, noise will just fly by faster than they can blink. It's not like users are going to compare the outputs of the two runs either.
| krinn wrote: | - Learning linux :
Seeing the compile output gave me knowledge of tools like gcc, glibc, libtool, make...
Even i don't "know" gcc... I could clearly see what is gcc, when it is use, for what it is use... Those are words people using gentoo handle fast, and seeing them in context help anyone getting that knowledge. If you hide output to new user, then you could lower or gave the impression to the user that he doesn't learn anything a binary distro couldn't teach him too.
It's something that might appears strange to a dev, but not all users are devs, and you might forget "common" user doesn't know at first what are these tools.
Seeing the compile process just make user get familiar fast with common linux tools, just look in the forum, how many gentoo ask something and when an answer came with "you need gcc version 4.3 to do that", how many of them answer : "what is gcc?" |
Watching shit scroll by doesn't teach you Linux. Anyone who needs to learn how to develop Linux software will learn the tools by research and doing.
| krinn wrote: | - Time relationship :
With a binary distro you can have bars to see your progress to install something or a timed value, but gentoo cannot really do that in a reliable way, and portage doesn't try to do that anyway (even genlop or other solution exist).
So the only relation a user have with time is a feeling of time passing, by seeing the build process on screen, removing that, you simply deny user any chance to have a timeable value, leaving the user with no time index at all and stuck with "emerge that" on screen until end. When someone first build openoffice, you can even see some users coming to query if it's normal to wait that much. But because of the compile output on their screen, most (if not all) of them never stop the process even they have the feeling it's so long that it might not be normal. They don't doubt portage is working as they see it working and don't break the process. Because even they doubt the time taken is too long, they know the time already taken was to work and not lost, hence the "i think it's too long, but it seems to work" kind of thread.
And that's dangerous, really, binary distro will show emerging of package with a time value and progress bar, and even they need 1 hour to install something (and that's not a serious example to speak about hours to install a binary package), the user will have a clue of its end.
While with default value to hide output, a new gentoo user could get stucks minutes, hours or even days with a "emerging that" on screen, it's his first steps in gentoo, and it appears that portage is stuck and isn't doing anything. The user don't know what is going on, why it take this long, when this will end, and it seems portage isn't working at all and the user is waiting for nothing in an infinite loop.
At this point many users might just give up because they think they didn't do something right and portage isn't working, and nothing (for a new user coming with binary distro experience this mean : reinstalling again the system from step 0) they have tried unstuck portage. That thing is simply not working.
What a nice experience installing gentoo gave them : reading a doc blindly with plenty words they never seen, libtool, gcc... Trying to follow it just to see that thing is stuck when they try to install one program ! Breaking it, redo, stuck, re-install, re-emerge, damn still get stuck !
It's like seeing a counter on screen, even you see only some numbers climbing without knowing at what number the end will come, your perception of time is not the same as seeing nothing on the screen, because you see the counter climbling, you have a clue of time elaspse, lol even it's not a promise you won't be stuck for days, it gave you a feeling it's still going on and the waiting appears shorter (just turn off your TV and wait 1 minute, you'll see it appers far longer than seeing a watch counting a minute on screen). If it goes beyong your patience, you get off and do something else, and you can come back to see if the numbers are still climbing, while the "nothing on screen" version, you will get the stuck impression and want to give up. |
And the sooner users learn that the system build tools don't just 'lock up' the better. Also, the sooner they realise UNIX tool defaults are to be quiet until told otherwise by the user the better, too.
If anything, a quiet default only telling the user what package emerge is working on is more beneficial to the newbie. Sure, looking at a wall of text fly by your eyes far faster than you could possibly read is mesmerising and exciting when you're starting out, but it's also still just a load of useless irrelevant noise flooding your TTY and drowning out useful informative printing, and certainly leaves you unsure about how far along the job is.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
carpenterguy
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 132
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This change caught me by surprise, I thought maybe something was wrong with my system, why was -v not working?
I prefer the output, I want to know what is going on ... is it running? what app is taking so long?
Sometimes I may get a kernel update that I have not compiled. I am happy with 3.1 do not need 3.1-r1
So when a broadcom or nvidia update comes along, I can see what happened and why it failed without having to read the tmp build log.
Give myself a face palm and reset my working kernel and continue the update.
Now I know we have an option to change the default with --default-build= To show my noobness, I have no idea where or which file that option is in.... I have looked without success. will keep looking.
It looks like something that belongs in make.conf, but since I never had it before, do I now need to add it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zmedico
Developer
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 352
Location: California USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| carpenterguy wrote: | This change caught me by surprise, I thought maybe something was wrong with my system, why was -v not working?
I prefer the output, I want to know what is going on ... is it running? what app is taking so long?
Sometimes I may get a kernel update that I have not compiled. I am happy with 3.1 do not need 3.1-r1
So when a broadcom or nvidia update comes along, I can see what happened and why it failed without having to read the tmp build log.
Give myself a face palm and reset my working kernel and continue the update. |
With the new quiet default, the entire build log is automatically displayed when a build error occurs.
| carpenterguy wrote: | Now I know we have an option to change the default with --default-build= To show my noobness, I have no idea where or which file that option is in.... I have looked without success. will keep looking.
It looks like something that belongs in make.conf, but since I never had it before, do I now need to add it? |
In case you didn't know, you can change it back to the old default like this:
| Code: | | echo "EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=\"\${EMERGE_DEFAUT_OPTS} --quiet-build=n\"" >> /etc/make.conf |
_________________
Zac |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erin
n00b
Joined: 09 Mar 2010
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like the change has been made and nothing said now will change anything, but still, I feel strongly enough to at least post about it.
I've been using gentoo for around 6 years now, specifically because it doesn't hide whats going on.
I don't develop software, I just like having all the nuts and bolts of they system easily available to me.
If I wanted to know virtually nothing about how the build is going, I'd background it, or toss it on another virtual terminal, or something similar.
The build output isn't useless. It can give you warnings, like say distcc isn't working among other things, that will not actually cause a build to fail, but still may be important.
It also lets you know that the build is still progressing, hasn't hung, something load averages won't necessarily let you know.
Yes, I know I can set if back to the old behavior, but why default to hiding when the gentoo default for nearly everything seems to have been show everything unless told not to?
Overall this change feels way too much in the spirit of the trend to make computers shiny over functional. Gentoo doesn't need to be "user friendly", there are plenty of other linux distros out there for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1118
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Erin wrote: | | The build output isn't useless. It can give you warnings, like say distcc isn't working among other things, that will not actually cause a build to fail, but still may be important. |
That's filterable, and many relevant warnings are filtered already, the rest is garbage. If you really want all warnings logged you could add that feature request to bugzilla.
| Erin wrote: | | It also lets you know that the build is still progressing, hasn't hung, something load averages won't necessarily let you know. |
The incrementing gcc pid's will. And beside that, builds don't just hang.
| Erin wrote: | Yes, I know I can set if back to the old behavior, but why default to hiding when the gentoo default for nearly everything seems to have been show everything unless told not to?
Overall this change feels way too much in the spirit of the trend to make computers shiny over functional. Gentoo doesn't need to be "user friendly", there are plenty of other linux distros out there for that. |
Spewing noise isn't a function, it's just noise. I don't call a radio receiving background radiation a function, it's just noise. Noise doesn't give you anything, on the contrary, by definition, it drowns out useful information.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dalek
Veteran
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1353
Location: Mississippi USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Erin wrote: | Seems like the change has been made and nothing said now will change anything, but still, I feel strongly enough to at least post about it.
|
Figured that out to didn't you? Seems I'm not alone on this thought. 
_________________
My rig: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P mobo, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core CPU, ZALMAN CNPS10X Performa CPU cooler,
G.SKILL 32GB DDR3 PC3 12800 Memory Nvidia GTX-650 video card LG W2253 Monitor
60TBs of hard drive space using LVM
Cooler Master HAF-932 Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cach0rr0
Bodhisattva
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 4123
Location: Houston, Republic of Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zmedico wrote: |
In case you didn't know, you can change it back to the old default like this:
| Code: | | echo "EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=\"\${EMERGE_DEFAUT_OPTS} --quiet-build=n\"" >> /etc/make.conf |
|
to be honest, i thought i would hate the change.
but now that ive rolled with it for a few days (or a week?), I'm finding it just doesn't bother me heaps. For the package or two where I cared to watch the output, it was easy enough to fire up another terminal or tab and:
| Code: |
tail -n1 -f /var/tmp/portage/<category>/<package>/temp/build.log
|
I think I'd probably still like for -v to show build output, but that's one of those for me that, if consensus prefers otherwise, I'm not going to cry about it.
_________________
Lost configuring your system?
dump lspci -n here | see Pappy's guide | Link Stash |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Indech
n00b
Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can think of two issues that immediately come to mind in hiding the output by default.
First off, when a compile fails, and you're going to have some compiles fail, I'd rather be able to just look at the output and not have to dig through the compile log directories to find out what the compile failure is. Furthermore, my compile output is colored, and as such is easier to read, where as the text file of the compile is not.
Secondly, I've had an issue a couple of times where the compile stalled on a specific area of the compile. When looking at the output I can easily notice a problem when nothing is happening for a couple of minutes. With suppressed output I would have had no idea that was happening.
I suppose it's time to add alias emerge='emerge --quiet-build=n' to root's .bashrc to fix Gentoo stupidity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cach0rr0
Bodhisattva
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 4123
Location: Houston, Republic of Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Indech wrote: |
I suppose it's time to add alias emerge='emerge --quiet-build=n' to root's .bashrc to fix Gentoo stupidity. |
or just disable the feature in make.conf as has been mentioned above, and will be mentioned in a news item once the feature is pushed out to stable users.
_________________
Lost configuring your system?
dump lspci -n here | see Pappy's guide | Link Stash |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1118
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Indech wrote: | | Secondly, I've had an issue a couple of times where the compile stalled on a specific area of the compile. When looking at the output I can easily notice a problem when nothing is happening for a couple of minutes. With suppressed output I would have had no idea that was happening. |
man top(1)
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dalek
Veteran
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1353
Location: Mississippi USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AidanJT wrote: | | Indech wrote: | | Secondly, I've had an issue a couple of times where the compile stalled on a specific area of the compile. When looking at the output I can easily notice a problem when nothing is happening for a couple of minutes. With suppressed output I would have had no idea that was happening. |
man top(1) |
Or just simply look at the screen and see it isn't moving. 
_________________
My rig: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P mobo, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core CPU, ZALMAN CNPS10X Performa CPU cooler,
G.SKILL 32GB DDR3 PC3 12800 Memory Nvidia GTX-650 video card LG W2253 Monitor
60TBs of hard drive space using LVM
Cooler Master HAF-932 Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1118
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dalek wrote: | Or just simply look at the screen and see it isn't moving.
|
And constantly waste way more resources watching pointless shit scroll by on the 1 in a trillion trillion chance gcc will actually hang. Sounds like a fine default to me.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dalek
Veteran
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1353
Location: Mississippi USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AidanJT wrote: | | dalek wrote: | Or just simply look at the screen and see it isn't moving.
|
And constantly waste way more resources watching pointless shit scroll by on the 1 in a trillion trillion chance gcc will actually hang. Sounds like a fine default to me. |
Yep. It worked for a looooong time. It wasn't broke. It didn't need fixin.
_________________
My rig: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P mobo, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core CPU, ZALMAN CNPS10X Performa CPU cooler,
G.SKILL 32GB DDR3 PC3 12800 Memory Nvidia GTX-650 video card LG W2253 Monitor
60TBs of hard drive space using LVM
Cooler Master HAF-932 Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjy0724
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 165
Location: Lock Haven, Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
I originally voted for the "-v" option, but hiding it by default would likely be more useful. However, if it is desired on a regular basis setting it in make.conf to be the best idea. Lastly, if "diarrhea of the console" is desired on a "as-needed" basis, I think that a "-vv" could be more useful to ensure it is really wanted. 
My .02, enjoy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1118
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dalek wrote: | | Yep. It worked for a looooong time. It wasn't broke. It didn't need fixin. |
It was broken. That's not UNIX behaviour, it's stupid and wasteful behaviour.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dalek
Veteran
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 1353
Location: Mississippi USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AidanJT wrote: | | dalek wrote: | | Yep. It worked for a looooong time. It wasn't broke. It didn't need fixin. |
It was broken. That's not UNIX behaviour, it's stupid and wasteful behaviour. |
If you install Linux from Scratch, is the compile process hidden? From my understanding and impression after years of using Gentoo, Gentoo is Linux from Scratch with a package manager and other tools such as config updates etc. There was nothing wrong with the output being seen. If it was, it would have been fixed a very long time ago. Gentoo has a lot of great devs that make sure broken things are fixed. So, if it was broken, why the heck did it take them years to fix it? Also, if it was broke, then you must not think much of the Gentoo devs. I may disagree with Zac on this setting, but I do know that he has done some, let me rephrase that, he has done an awesome job with portage. Some is making what he has done look like to little. He has done much more than "little".
So, either it wasn't broke or you think the devs have been sitting around for years not fixing something. Care to say which?
_________________
My rig: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P mobo, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core CPU, ZALMAN CNPS10X Performa CPU cooler,
G.SKILL 32GB DDR3 PC3 12800 Memory Nvidia GTX-650 video card LG W2253 Monitor
60TBs of hard drive space using LVM
Cooler Master HAF-932 Case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
disi
Veteran
Joined: 28 Nov 2003
Posts: 1354
Location: Out There ...
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AidanJT wrote: | | dalek wrote: | | Yep. It worked for a looooong time. It wasn't broke. It didn't need fixin. |
It was broken. That's not UNIX behaviour, it's stupid and wasteful behaviour. |
BSD shows compile output...
| Code: | | % cd /usr/ports/blubb/bla && make install clean |
_________________
Gentoo on Uptime Project - Larry is a cow |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
