Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:54:57 +0100 From: Alexander@Leidinger.net To: Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [TEST] make -j patch [take 2] Message-ID: <1100274897.4194dcd1d67d6@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20041112160137.X42945@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> References: <6857.1100271323@critter.freebsd.dk> <20041112160137.X42945@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Zitat von Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org>: > PK>>If yes: we have some ports which aren't -j safe, so this would violate > PK>>POLA. > PK> > PK>That is what "make -B" is for. > > Or .NOTPARALLEL I'm not talking about /usr/ports/category/port/Makefile, I'm talking about /usr/ports/category/port/work/tarball_dir/**/Makefile. We don't have control about those Makefiles. As much as I like a flag in the Makefile of a port which indicates that a port can't be build with -j, we don't have this and the last time this topic was discussed there was a strong objection to something like this. So this change may break procedures which worked so far. Bye, Alexander.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1100274897.4194dcd1d67d6>