From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 20 15:54:19 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BA891065675; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:54:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mandree@FreeBSD.org) Received: from unimail.uni-dortmund.de (mx1.HRZ.Uni-Dortmund.DE [129.217.128.51]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A741B8FC19; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:54:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (p4FE32575.dip.t-dialin.net [79.227.37.117]) (authenticated bits=0) by unimail.uni-dortmund.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id p7KFsG37003398 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 20 Aug 2011 17:54:16 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E4FD8A8.8070008@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 17:54:16 +0200 From: Matthias Andree Organization: FreeBSD User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2 Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org References: <201108201153.p7KBrPOV054618@repoman.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201108201153.p7KBrPOV054618@repoman.freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/misc/shared-mime-info Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:54:19 -0000 Am 20.08.2011 13:53, schrieb Matthias Andree: > mandree 2011-08-20 11:53:25 UTC > > FreeBSD ports repository > > Modified files: > misc/shared-mime-info Makefile > Log: > Mark MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE. > > Revision Changes Path > 1.63 +1 -0 ports/misc/shared-mime-info/Makefile Can we please make sure that pointyhat runs the next non-experimental builds with FORCE_MAKE_JOBS enabled so that we can flip the switch after the RELENG_9 tag will be laid on the ports tree? Ports not being able to build in parallel processes are a nuisance. The preference would clearly be "fix it" rather than "mark unsafe", but the latter would be OK as a stopgap measure to unbreak the build.