From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 9 02:18:03 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A23B1065693 for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 02:18:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DC98FC16 for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 02:18:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyf19 with SMTP id 19so18777294wyf.13 for ; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 18:18:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pjUEnGh2XQKqgtz3zpHcT9WrqYkdQ4291gaExkdKcwc=; b=w4t51dGu0e4ZflLizzSGOoKEejnoy5oiwpHzERvGS9jZsoy47AyEDDDWye9dlzA5ng Ij39uChCm/IbxgnMyY4JVYeuD1eLv6F+qIrE4UtBmePYH3cwxA9A4mJWgHNn70DWf609 8cq5PSWz8HI7L2gDo6MGiayHzIzdjvJCi/nUs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=OB3b+wH3jrWRO7YPD4PydMyP90R/Sw08wrd43a3gEYTYXLSfj+hThB4zW+yuMCqEKl SHG4xXvSIPG5gJNEhI+eAMUwu2kPFGDfGUSC7sO/4DU2lprXn4oepTWnD5w4e4S3jpVU JPq1K8ZMIeJyA1fRlDYOMHSx0ps6WObQAY3Nw= Received: by 10.227.155.66 with SMTP id r2mr2300090wbw.73.1294539481949; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 18:18:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk [87.194.105.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 11sm18917125wbj.1.2011.01.08.18.18.00 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 08 Jan 2011 18:18:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 02:17:58 +0000 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20110109021758.68641f42@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: References: <66353398.20110108234322@yandex.ru> <20110108220931.000061d2@unknown> <20110108233740.322f7665@gumby.homeunix.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.22.1; i386-portbld-freebsd8.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: error while compile port X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 02:18:03 -0000 On Sat, 8 Jan 2011 17:33:40 -0700 (MST) Warren Block wrote: > > They are also doing very different things. MAKE_JOBS_SAFE applies > > -j to GNU make, which is invoked to do the actual compiling of > > third-party software. make -j 16 install applies -j to BSD make, > > which is used to implement the ports system itself. > > gmake isn't used by every port, AFAIK. I'd always assumed that most ports would be sufficiently gnucentric to make gmake the norm (if only as the path of least-resistance), but it appears to be the opposite. It ain't what you don't know, ... > But I can't quite come up > with a clear way of saying that I think -j applies to the top-level > make (the one running the ports system) while > MAKE_JOBS_SAFE/MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER is applied to the make(s) actually > building the port. I don't know much about make, but I presume it's because MAKEFLAGS is rewritten and the options are passed down as explicit arguments to [g]make. -j is a little odd though, because it need to work over all the make processes. It doesn't really matter because passing -j to the top-level isn't supported. It's an unfortunate consequence of the ports system being encoded in makefiles that people lose track of the distinction between the two levels. In Gentoo the upper layer is scripting, and everyone understands that -j just applies to the third-party makefiles.