From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jan 20 16:56:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from phnxpop5.phnx.uswest.net (phnxpop5.phnx.uswest.net [206.80.192.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 41B8F37B400 for ; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:56:13 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 85210 invoked by uid 0); 21 Jan 2001 00:56:12 -0000 Received: from ndslppp221.phnx.uswest.net (HELO pinyon.org) (63.224.136.221) by phnxpop5.phnx.uswest.net with SMTP; 21 Jan 2001 00:56:12 -0000 Received: from chomsky.Pinyon.ORG (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pinyon.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0B8F87; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:56:11 -0700 (MST) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:56:11 -0700 Message-Id: <20010121005611.C0B8F87@pinyon.org> From: "Russell L. Carter" To: "Duncan Barclay" Cc: "Wes Peters" , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 Subject: Re: Clustering FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message from Duncan Barclay of "Sun, 21 Jan 2001 00:15:41 GMT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I'm going to try these ideas out, thanks for the pointers. I'm highly motivated to stop waiting so long :-). And a nice use for the systems that have been piling up, if this works out. I'll be reporting back... Cheers, Russell % %On 20-Jan-01 Wes Peters wrote: %> "Russell L. Carter" wrote: % %
% %>> %See the paper "Recursive Make Considered Harmful." Make is an amazing %>> %tool when used correctly. %>> %>> That's not the problem, unfortunately. I've never had a problem %>> rebuilding dependencies unnecessarily, or any of those %>> other problems described. Well precompiled headers would be %>> really really cool. The problem, again, is that parallelism %>> is limited by the directory structure, and the directory structure %>> is entirely rational. %> %> The directory structure has nothing to do with the Makefiles. To %> obtain the goal the paper suggests, you replace the recursive %> Makefiles with a single top-level Makefile that describes ALL of the %> targets and ALL of the dependencies. Note that this does not require %> a single mono- lithic Makefile; the top level Makefile can be a shell %> that includes per-directory Makefiles. The important part is to get a %> single dependency tree with no cycles in the graph. % %I was so impressed by the clarity in the paper and dicussions with %friends that use Plan 9's "mk", that I put together "remake". This is a %Makefile framework that implements the per-directory Makefiles to build %the dependency tree. If anyone one wants to take a look it's at % http://www.ragnet.demon.co.uk/RM/remake.html %I haven't used it for a year or two and can only point to % http://www.ragnet.demon.co.uk/mynews %as an example of its use. % %If anyone gets interested drop me a line and I will try and remember how %it works. % %Duncan % To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message