From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 25 09:53:12 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 25B44106566C; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:53:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swell.k@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E184A8FC2D; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:53:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swell.k@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id l9so3073596rvb.43 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 02:53:11 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=DbLCDdbvtbGYZ2SqEOwcNULIUAdpidlPJMbnZ7Y/Hiw=; b=eBawg50amFUI0RCd8UaHDjstZ36ZsH5x2Nv9xeCNbjYQOhb2oVqxfJcbMLNLblNov/ 3wXUsk3UI2OvbFMNR2CpkRup1shql6nuleQ8t61CGhhyTDTCYNtIdr5fm9bYCv191FYh ysttOvxiIauLGNTWksK71uDviizKmH2e+AtA4= 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:content-transfer-encoding; b=FwApLOz2ChFSs1s9LznFbHNnbRWv0UvGJJ5rFg0qFkScHqH1FMEPrC5y5/k4qQP3S3 EoA8w3E2kjwBJgaLAukKxo6UUNH6fsJZ474n3XsJV7bODCVqlzrS/be2yad18fmbyked EymUc0GkoOuGUb1KqT0w1JfSzYG8lGyDqWlQc= Received: by 10.141.162.13 with SMTP id p13mr3483351rvo.257.1237974791476; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 02:53:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (95-24-174-59.broadband.corbina.ru [95.24.174.59]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g31sm16579946rvb.57.2009.03.25.02.53.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 02:53:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Anonymous To: pav@FreeBSD.org References: <1237901632.1849.19.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <86eiwmglso.fsf@gmail.com> <1237970433.41376.4.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:51:52 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1237970433.41376.4.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> (Pav Lucistnik's message of "Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:40:33 +0100") Message-ID: <86eiwmvsjr.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.91 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 09:53:12 -0000 Pav Lucistnik writes: > Anonymous píše v st 25. 03. 2009 v 09:26 +0300: >> 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 >> >> Is this completely discouraged? > > I suppose you can use internal variable _MAKE_JOBS directly. Why are you > stripping -j just to add it back again? Oh, so you're not against the idea. The substitution was to be able to easy replace it with something else. FYI, that example went to ports/133054.