From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 25 06:48:02 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27499106564A for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 06:48:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swell.k@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f164.google.com (mail-bw0-f164.google.com [209.85.218.164]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3AA8FC19 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 06:48:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swell.k@gmail.com) Received: by bwz8 with SMTP id 8so2389386bwz.43 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:48:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:cc:subject:references :date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=ZLfojj5JFtEcPKdfyqoxKwQ+b/e7HDuAMfP90kFgwCY=; b=rDDgOwuzP6cWCFY9zslZHpfHOEdhPPxrjQm8PCBca64HmDqJJEWcheBjvLMeb+uVuV St1dMVZIhjMENPHmqYeaPC2vHWX+gfvKEV39FvJcsCkx1G8tdx34q1L+18puXAZIoR90 tZLQnwL885scgNcFCs4i1iYfEgJpHcQUZ8HZQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=IpXI9Nd8eijpWYo+TLpt+DV86F9SM2InV8cSuIyanwQN9T3h1CXVawtBUPhDFA1YRs ybMslZXhiCltvZXtUFL8XEFrOjbhfK9bltAOzHWQXu5CmoNVDJNbRuKs0jpihBwqzynZ rT3ipKly2klHUK1p11K6LPYKHMTvmrAyDsKaY= Received: by 10.103.105.1 with SMTP id h1mr4021440mum.13.1237962437036; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:27:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (95-24-174-59.broadband.corbina.ru [95.24.174.59]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j10sm13754977muh.1.2009.03.24.23.27.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:27:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Anonymous To: pav@FreeBSD.org References: <1237901632.1849.19.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:26:47 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1237901632.1849.19.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> (Pav Lucistnik's message of "Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:33:52 +0100") Message-ID: <86eiwmglso.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.91 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP multi processor compilations for everyone 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, 25 Mar 2009 06:48:02 -0000 --=-=-= Pav Lucistnik writes: > If you are FreeBSD port maintainer: I'm not one. > > Nothing changes for you, if you don't want. If you want to enable the > use of multiple cores in your port, add MAKE_JOBS_SAFE=yes to a block > somewhere below dependency declarations. If you know your port does not > handle -jX well, and want to disable it from using -jX even when user > forces this feature, use MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes. And that's all to it. Not all ports build using make/gmake. Wouldn't it be better to export the number of parallel processes so maintainer can decide whether to use it in his port build system? For example --=-=-= Content-Type: text/x-diff Content-Disposition: inline; filename=mark.diff Index: devel/boost/Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/csup/ports/devel/boost/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.42 diff -u -p -r1.42 Makefile --- devel/boost/Makefile 20 Feb 2009 01:13:49 -0000 1.42 +++ devel/boost/Makefile 25 Mar 2009 06:12:06 -0000 @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ COMMENT= Free peer-reviewed portable C++ USE_BZIP2= yes USE_LDCONFIG= yes +MAKE_JOBS_SAFE= yes WRKSRC= ${WRKDIR}/${PORTNAME}_${PORTVERSION:S/./_/g} .if defined(WITH_PYTHON) || defined (WITH_PYSTE) @@ -87,6 +88,7 @@ PLIST_SUB+= BOOST_PYSTE="@comment " BOOST_TOOLS= gcc BJAM_OPTIONS= --layout=system +BJAM_OPTIONS+= -j${_MAKE_JOBS:S/-j//} .if defined (WITH_VERBOSE_BUILD) BJAM_OPTIONS+= -d2 .endif --=-=-= Is this completely discouraged? --=-=-=--