From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Nov 12 14:55:25 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4089316A4CE; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:55:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9B00D43D54; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:55:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iACEtNQ0006858;
	Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:55:23 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Alexander@Leidinger.net
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:18:27 +0100."
             <1100269107.4194c6330d578@netchild.homeip.net> 
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:55:23 +0100
Message-ID: <6857.1100271323@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
cc: Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [TEST] make -j patch [take 2] 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:55:25 -0000

In message <1100269107.4194c6330d578@netchild.homeip.net>, Alexander@Leidinger.
net writes:
>Zitat von Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>:
>
>> At the very least, do not commit your patch until you have managed
>> to come up with at least one instance of real world data where it
>> is a good idea.
>
>I followed the discussion so far, but I may have failed to see the obvious...
>
>What happens if "make -j X" runs in a situation where portupgrade gets
>called (e.g. a Makefile which runs some portupgrades in parallel for
>a set of ports (without overlapping in the dependency graph))?
>
>I assume from the discussion that the make which gets invoked by
>portupgrade (without -j) will connect to the FIFO and attempt to build
>some targets in parallel. Is this correct?
>
>If yes: we have some ports which aren't -j safe, so this would violate
>POLA.

That is what "make -B" is for.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.