Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 2 May 1997 14:00:08 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        bsdhack@shadows.aeon.net (mika ruohotie)
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: make flags
Message-ID:  <199705022100.OAA09474@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <199705021852.VAA03005@shadows.aeon.net> from "mika ruohotie" at May 2, 97 09:52:14 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> something that made me wonder...
> 
> earlier today i read about 'make -j' stuff from the smp list, and i
> got the impression that for single cpu something like '-j 4' would
> give some performance boost.
> 
> but, i experimented with it myself earlier today and it didnt boost
> anything... the fastest compiling i got without any 'j's, i tested
> '-j 2' and '-j 4'
> 
> uh, am i missing something? it's only pentium pro spesific? (i have pentium)
> 
> my other kernel flags are '-O2 -pipe'

The makefiles must be "-j" aware.

For a build world, this includes modifying "/etc/make.conf".

There's a lot of changes that went into makeing -j work down to
inferior makefiles (check out the "parallel make" thread in the
-current archives).

All in all, I don't think you'd get much of a win from anything
other than -current with the changes in place.

Someone needs to cookbook this.  Personally, I always build the
absolute minimum I need to build, and would be just as happy with
a build process that installed and cleaned behind itself on a per
item basis so as to never require more than one utility worth of
object tree space at any one time.  So I'm not a good choice to
cookbook parallel makes.  8-(.


					Regards,
					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705022100.OAA09474>