From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 12 17:56:12 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AF231065672 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:56:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@maxlor.com) Received: from popeye1.ggamaur.net (popeye1.ggamaur.net [213.160.40.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5868FC1F for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:56:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@maxlor.com) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu (c-82-192-240-247.customer.ggaweb.ch [82.192.240.247]) by popeye1.ggamaur.net (8.13.7/8.13.7/Submit) with ESMTP id m2CHVmoB051028; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:31:49 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from mail@maxlor.com) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3CEB2E349; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:31:43 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at atlantis.intranet Received: from maxlor.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlantis.intranet [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id llkNOnsLjw8d; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:31:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from mini.intranet (mini.intranet [10.0.0.17]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D4A72E346; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:31:43 +0100 (CET) From: Benjamin Lutz To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:31:36 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <200803121311.51383.mail@maxlor.com> <20080312154725.705e141c@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <20080312154725.705e141c@gumby.homeunix.com.> X-Face: $Ov27?7*N,h60fIEfNJdb!m,@#4T/d; 1hw|W0zvsHM(a$Yn6BYQ0^SEEXvi8>D`|V*F"=?utf-8?q?=5F+=0A=09R2?=@Aq>+mNb4`,'[[%z9v0Fa~]AD1}xQO3|>b.z&}l#R-_(P`?@Mz"kS; XC>Eti,i3>%@=?utf-8?q?g=3F=0A=094f?=,\c7|Ghwb&ky$b2PJ^\0b83NkLsFKv|smL/cI4UD%Tu8alAD MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1857949.ls2XFFsIdn"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200803121831.43296.mail@maxlor.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 213.160.40.60 Cc: RW Subject: Re: ports/113132 (make -j patch) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:56:12 -0000 --nextPart1857949.ls2XFFsIdn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 12 March 2008 16:47:25 RW wrote: > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:11:51 +0100 > Benjamin Lutz wrote: > > This patch has been sitting in GNATS for a couple of months now: > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3Dports/113132 > > > > I've received a few mails from people reporting success, and none > > reporting that bad things have happened. Is it possible to get this > > committed? > > I'm not keen on the way MAKE_JOBS_WHITELIST is implemented as a list. > It seems to be out of step with the way similar problems are handled > elsewhere. I would have expected a simple flag that can be set per > port using portsconf, pkgtools.conf, etc. portconf and pkgtools.conf are files that are used by tools external to=20 the base ports system (portmaster and portupgrade). The ports makefiles=20 do not read them. The traditional place to put port configuration info=20 is /etc/make.conf. Since using the whitelist is not intended to be an officially supported=20 feature, but only exists to make life a bit easier for people who are=20 debugging the ports or willing to experiment, I expect that on 99% of=20 =46reeBSD systems, the whitelist will not be specified at all. I=20 therefore see no reason to increase the complexity of the whitelist=20 parsing code by introducing non-make-compatible syntax. > This is more of a bikeshed issue, but the term MAKE_JOBS reflects > implementation (gmake -j) rather than function, and its meaning isn't > obvious the way something like PARALLEL_BUILD would be. The patch used the name PARALLEL in a previous incarnation; MAKE_JOBS=20 was chosen to avoid misunderstandings and name conflicts with ongoing=20 work to allow several ports to be built in parallel, independently of=20 each other. MAKE_JOBS might not have as nice a ring to it, but the=20 intention is clearer. Cheers Benjamin --nextPart1857949.ls2XFFsIdn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBH2BN/zZEjpyKHuQwRAo7XAJ9ok5Cvcrqre9Hnab6Zrg4W7rv5QQCfd5W5 WSEAjOAwb6p/isbBQdhMAw8= =JF0i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1857949.ls2XFFsIdn--