From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 23 11:17:37 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFEAA106564A; Sat, 23 May 2009 11:17:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from naylor.b.david@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f159.google.com (mail-ew0-f159.google.com [209.85.219.159]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E099F8FC08; Sat, 23 May 2009 11:17:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from naylor.b.david@gmail.com) Received: by ewy3 with SMTP id 3so2374421ewy.43 for ; Sat, 23 May 2009 04:17:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:organization:to:subject :date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=ngU8aXvEVdZiICG6isvY4Z/FgYfqMlD5DoZkKEl7ICg=; b=a8TlW4Neaa5Z2sEjlcOY9y/fK02q58qYhofEWhGS6euMtmHPs3n7QPtCK5DBrbnP1P jAJBPXbdmlqgsY76s18kbDMuFgDksEI2n+v43fY1SWZbTN2rRN1Rzs/b6n3Wt0cwTcnk 4QnZEHERzTK5h83u1E32nfj8NR1lpa7a/NnpE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:organization:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :message-id; b=M5FgvdC8ruf9Dk1vDpeqHts1vvtpIdPPC5BPVPYBGVoc3A2gdrAJgovtlGJL1ynqCa KGz50czFI9j6Te/D34ZA2x4T3SgcYmljllB9VVGhYMOT+w00pJq/gaYHaaXOGk3XwTyc J1XWxBKsWaZ8IwJ5jh8tdrqDs/ffqsxFA/w5g= Received: by 10.210.88.3 with SMTP id l3mr2137763ebb.75.1243077455894; Sat, 23 May 2009 04:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?0.0.0.0? ([196.34.241.123]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 24sm6195792eyx.43.2009.05.23.04.17.34 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 23 May 2009 04:17:35 -0700 (PDT) From: David Naylor Organization: Private To: "Ion-Mihai Tetcu" Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 13:18:26 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <20090522.195350.193746535.chat95@mac.com> <20090523.182426.193741786.chat95@mac.com> <20090523135133.71a92669@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20090523135133.71a92669@it.buh.tecnik93.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1469016.yjcZGTeecn"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200905231318.29346.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> Cc: pgollucci@p6m7g8.com, pav@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE (some more ports) 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: Sat, 23 May 2009 11:17:38 -0000 --nextPart1469016.yjcZGTeecn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday 23 May 2009 12:51:33 Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > On Sat, 23 May 2009 18:24:26 +0900 (JST) > Maho NAKATA wrote: > > > Please see attached for the patch. The changes to bsd.port.mk: > > > - MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER always defined > > > - MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER forced to 1 if UNSAFE of DISABLE > > AFAIR there are ports that compile OK w/o MAKE_JOBS_SAFE but fail with > MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER=3D1 That is quite a problem. And this reveals a problem with openoffice-2*, it= =20 doesn't work since it does (in-effect): =2Eif (${MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER} > 1) which will not work for MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER=3D`${SYSCTL} -n kern.smp.cpus`. I= s=20 there anyway for MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER to get a resolved value (I think expandin= g=20 make to expose the number of cores on the system [rather radical, I know]).= =20 If MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER can be 'fixed' then the solution is straight forward: =2Eif (${MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER} > 1) # Use concurrent build =2Eelse # Use standard build =2Eendif > > > - MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER defaults (but user defined) to number of cores > > This part looks OK, I wonder if there's any reason t ain't like this > now; Pav? > -.if defined(MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER) > +MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER?=3D `${SYSCTL} -n kern.smp.cpus` > _MAKE_JOBS=3D -j${MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER} > -.else > -_MAKE_JOBS=3D -j`${SYSCTL} -n kern.smp.cpus` > -.endif > > I believe pav@ didn't put the ' && !defined(MAKE_JOBS_SAFE)' part > intentionally until we get to test all our ports. > -.if defined(FORCE_MAKE_JOBS) > +.if defined(FORCE_MAKE_JOBS) && !defined(MAKE_JOBS_SAFE) > BUILD_FAIL_MESSAGE+=3D "You have chosen to use multiple make jobs > (parallelization) for all ports. This port was not tested for this > setting. Please remove FORCE_MAKE_JOBS and retry the build before > reporting the failure to the maintainer." Sorry but I don't see how this would change anything. The message will onl= y=20 get displayed if the port fails AND -DFORCE_MAKE_JOBS, which is the less=20 likely scenario. =20 I only changed it because when testing the command output with `make build = =2Dn`=20 the offset changed with -DFORCE_MAKE_JOBS on a safe port. I just found it= =20 annoying...=20 > > > I've then used MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER to set MAXPROCESSES, MAXMODULES and > > > NUMOFPROCESSES for openoffice-* (not including 1.*). > > > > > > I believe openoffice-2* can me marked as SAFE while openoffice-3* > > > should not be marked at all (since it sometimes works..., very well > > > for me :-). > > > > > > This patch just makes openoffice-* behave like other ports in > > > regards to parallel builds and the usual MAKE_JOBS variables now > > > works as expected. > > Nice, thanks. --nextPart1469016.yjcZGTeecn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAkoX24UACgkQUaaFgP9pFrJIGgCeLAQ/0uFP4dWstkzPSeLrsrud I+YAn3Q1gMIMMzDNc4UCyNeubBxPe9yf =cVJM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1469016.yjcZGTeecn--