Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:33:47 +0400 From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> Cc: Albert.Shih@obspm.fr, FreeBSD-Ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Idea for next portupgrade Message-ID: <486CF15B.50309@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <18540.55980.938489.721330@jerusalem.litteratus.org> References: <20080702232551.GA3204@pcjas.obspm.fr> <486CD2E8.50505@FreeBSD.org> <18540.55980.938489.721330@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Huff wrote: > Sergey Matveychuk writes: > >> > If portupgrade can calculate the depency and launch many ports >> > build in same time for non-depending ports it's can be >> > wonderful. >> >> I'm sure it's a good idea. I'd use it too. But I have a very >> little free time with my current employment. So I can't implement >> it. Sorry. > > It is also my understanding that ruby (used to manage the > ports database) a) is not re-entrant and/or b) does not lock the > files it is using/changing. Having two instances running at once > causes Bad Things(tm) to happen. It's not a ruby issue. Now you can run a few portupgrade processes if sets of updating ports is not intercepted. Otherwise one portupgrade process can clear a port directory when another process build the port. -- Dixi. Sem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?486CF15B.50309>