From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun 17 20:30:22 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B962B16A4CF; Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:30:22 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from hourri.hittite.isp.9tel.net (hourri.hittite.isp.9tel.net
	[62.62.156.10])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7877243D2D; Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:30:22 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from clefevre-lists@9online.fr)
Received: from pc2k (28-216-118-80.kaptech.net [80.118.216.28])
	by hourri.hittite.isp.9tel.net (Postfix) with SMTP
	id 3B1C7157644; Thu, 17 Jun 2004 23:14:40 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <065a01c454a9$d5c32a00$7890a8c0@dyndns.org>
From: "Cyrille Lefevre" <clefevre-lists@9online.fr>
To: <ports@freebsd.org>
References: <40D1C3C1.26556.7C76FE30@localhost>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 22:29:46 +0200
Organization: ACME
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
cc: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>
cc: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org>
Subject: Re: HEADS UP - master/slave ports
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:30:22 -0000

"Dan Langille" <dan@langille.org> wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2004 at 16:50, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
[snip]
> > there is no need to fork any sub-processes :
> > 
> > # Try to determine if we are a slave port.  These variables are used by
> > # FreshPorts and portsmon, but not yet by the ports framework itself.
> > _MASTERDIR=   ${MASTERDIR:C,/([^/]+)/\.\.,,:C,/([^/]+)/\.\.,,}
> > 
> > .if ${_MASTERDIR} != ${.CURDIR}
> > IS_SLAVE_PORT?=        yes
> > # take your pick :
> > # _PORTSDIR=    ${_MASTERDIR:C|([^/]+/[^/]+)/?$||}
> > # MASTERPORT=   ${_MASTERDIR:C|${_PORTSDIR}||}
> 
> real    15m24.018s
> user    10m39.785s
> sys     4m35.054s
> 
> > # or
> > MASTERPORT=     ${_MASTERDIR:H:T}/${_MASTERDIR:T}
> 
> real    15m23.343s
> user    10m39.088s
> sys     4m34.888s
> 
> > .else
> > IS_SLAVE_PORT?=        no
> > MASTERPORT=
> > .endif
> 
> These appear to be slightly faster than the previous stats I posted.  
> Everything is pratically identical in user time.  sys is where the 
> savings are being made. 

it's strange that this code (w/ no fork) is not much faster than 2 forks !

Ruslan, do you have any idea about that ?

CC -make maintainer

Cyrille Lefevre.
-- 
mailto:clefevre-lists@9online.fr