Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 13:51:33 +0300 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> To: Maho NAKATA <chat95@mac.com> Cc: pgollucci@p6m7g8.com, pav@FreeBSD.org, naylor.b.david@gmail.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE (some more ports) Message-ID: <20090523135133.71a92669@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20090523.182426.193741786.chat95@mac.com> References: <20090522.195350.193746535.chat95@mac.com> <20090522164138.236cb114@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <200905231101.59467.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> <20090523.182426.193741786.chat95@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/BS.66kOxQ4I9KX8OCANu19K
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 23 May 2009 18:24:26 +0900 (JST)
Maho NAKATA <chat95@mac.com> wrote:
> Hi David
>=20
> Many many thanks for your patch. I'll test it very soon.
>=20
> Just one comment
> > 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 :-).
> you can mark as SAFE for all of our ports.=20
For testing, right?
> If it's broken, its OOo issue.
Obviously.
> We should identify if dependencies are missing. -devel ports can be
> unsafe but 3, 3-RC 2, 2-RC must be safe.
>=20
> Please wait a few days to say ok.
I'll give them a try during this weekend.
> From: David Naylor <naylor.b.david@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE (some more ports)
> Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 11:01:56 +0200
[ .. ]
> > 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
> > - 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 (paralle=
lization) for all ports. This port was not tested for this setting. Pleas=
e remove FORCE_MAKE_JOBS and retry the build before reporting the failure t=
o the maintainer."
> > 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.
--=20
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu@FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
--Sig_/BS.66kOxQ4I9KX8OCANu19K
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAkoX1TUACgkQJ7GIuiH/oeW2FgCdFScg3lBmjYt1fNiGJAYR6pud
XyoAn3QyeS/xxYPJOEgAcZrmGJjEovuy
=FblI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Sig_/BS.66kOxQ4I9KX8OCANu19K--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090523135133.71a92669>