From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May 17 05:08:26 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: 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 9FE6A16A405
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 17 May 2006 05:08:26 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from paul.koch@statseeker.com)
Received: from wally.statseeker.com (wally.statscout.com [203.39.101.146])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DE5F43D45
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 17 May 2006 05:08:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from paul.koch@statseeker.com)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by wally.statseeker.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4H58N8Q033970;
	Wed, 17 May 2006 15:08:23 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from paul.koch@statseeker.com)
Received: from wally.statseeker.com ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (wally.statseeker.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
	port 10024)
	with LMTP id 33366-08; Wed, 17 May 2006 15:08:16 +1000 (EST)
Received: from speedy (speedy.statseeker.com [10.1.1.100])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by wally.statseeker.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4H58BLV033965
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT);
	Wed, 17 May 2006 15:08:11 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from paul.koch@statseeker.com)
From: Paul Koch <paul.koch@statseeker.com>
To: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 15:08:07 +1000
User-Agent: KMail/1.8
References: <200605171353.37745.paul.koch@statseeker.com>
	<20060517045403.GI1113@k7.mavetju>
In-Reply-To: <20060517045403.GI1113@k7.mavetju>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200605171508.07228.paul.koch@statseeker.com>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at statseeker.com
Cc: ports@freebsd.org
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
Reply-To: paul.koch@statseeker.com
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 05:08:26 -0000

On Wed, 17 May 2006 02:54 pm, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 01:53:37PM +1000, Paul Koch wrote:
> > Is it safe to compile multiple ports at the same time and not get
> > the makes to run into each other when building dependency ports ?
>
> 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!
>
> Edwin

So.... it would be nice to have some type of locking in the ports build.  
For example, when a make enters /usr/ports/{category}/{port}, it gets 
an exclusive lock on that port (maybe on the Makefile itself, or a 
specific lock file) before it attempts to build/install the port.  It 
could be done by using lockf, but that just forks more processes, and 
there are already lots of them. I'd dare to say.... maybe it could be a 
function of make itself. As in, extend make so it understands a new 
keyword that makes it get an exclusive lock, using flock(2).  

With locking, you should then be able to fire off lots of port builds 
and use up all those cpu cores :)

	Paul.