From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 12 19:31:45 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4843C16A406 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:31:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 93D9213C4B9 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:31:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2007 19:31:43 -0000 Received: from nat-wh-1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (EHLO [192.168.1.12]) [129.13.72.169] by mail.gmx.net (mp036) with SMTP; 12 Apr 2007 21:31:43 +0200 X-Authenticated: #5465401 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19w8yFcyt5wG0sjxCoeOHxsRmk2Gk3uhTEWgZFNh5 CxNQIrm51pEWm3 Message-ID: <461E8919.1080702@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:31:37 +0200 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070314) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Lutz References: <200704100452.40574.mail@maxlor.com> <1176391950.1820.3.camel@rnoland-ibm.acs.internap.com> <461E5F39.1030603@gmx.de> <200704122056.51123.mail@maxlor.com> In-Reply-To: <200704122056.51123.mail@maxlor.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Robert Noland , pav@freebsd.org Subject: Re: parallel builds revisited 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: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:31:45 -0000 Benjamin Lutz wrote: > I've looked at your patches and programs, and I'm starting to have a > fairly clear idea of solution should look like. I would like to see: > > * Integration into the existing ports framework. No new scripts or files > should be required. The whitelist file needs to go. That's what we all want. Just a couple of lines in bsd.port.mk > * Configuring the number of jobs should be automatic (but overridable), > based on kern.smp.cpus. I think the ports should only set something like: USE_JBUILD=yes and the users should be able to use something like: WITH_JBUILD=n to set the number of threads. Automatic setting of n would be something like kern.smp.cpus * 2, but you should at least have 256m per thread, for some ports even 512m. > Btw, do you think it's possible that a port can only be built with, n > parallel make jobs, but will fail with n+1? No. I do not think this can be the case.