parallel builds revisited
David Nečas (Yeti)
yeti at physics.muni.cz
Fri Apr 13 16:22:04 UTC 2007
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> Peter Pentchev píše v pá 13. 04. 2007 v 18:06 +0300:
> > >
> > > I was thinking about having it embedded in every port's Makefile
> > > directly, instead. Something like
> > >
> > > USE_MAKE_JOBS= 2
> > IMHO, hardcoding the number of jobs in the port's Makefile would not
> > be the best approach. I think a port should only flag whether it
> > supports parallel building at all or not - and leave the number of jobs
> > to either the ports framework or the administrator's choice.
> That was just an example. You can do
> USE_MAKE_JOBS= yes
> for autoscaling perfectly well. For details, see the patch I linked.
The patch gives no reason for such hardcoding, it just
implements it. How many ports exist that can fail with N+1
jobs yet cannot break with N jobs (for N > 1)?
More information about the freebsd-ports