From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May 17 07:57:03 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8271916A408
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 17 May 2006 07:57:03 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sem@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from relay-er5.mbrd.ru (relay-er5.mbrd.ru [194.117.71.33])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD20943D4C
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 17 May 2006 07:57:00 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from sem@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from msd.mbrd.ru ([172.16.33.193])
	by relay-er5.mbrd.ru with esmtpa (Exim 4.x) id 1FgGtl-000NCW-M2
	for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 11:56:49 +0400
Message-ID: <446AD740.70201@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 11:56:48 +0400
From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
References: <200605171353.37745.paul.koch@statseeker.com>	<20060517045403.GI1113@k7.mavetju>
	<20060517073919.GA169@pentarou.parodius.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060517073919.GA169@pentarou.parodius.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.2.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Is it safe to compile multiple ports at the same time ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 07:57:03 -0000

Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 02:54:03PM +1000, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
>> I once submitted a patch which checked for this. Now that I've
>> learned about lockf(1) I think there is a chance a next one will
>> be approved too!
> 
> Will this solve (indirectly I presume) the following issue?  If not,

Yes, it's just it for.

-- 
Dixi.
Sem.