Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 22:00:09 +0100 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Idea for next portupgrade Message-ID: <20080703220009.4da5ff08@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <18540.55980.938489.721330@jerusalem.litteratus.org> References: <20080702232551.GA3204@pcjas.obspm.fr> <486CD2E8.50505@FreeBSD.org> <18540.55980.938489.721330@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:57:00 -0400 Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> wrote: > > Sergey Matveychuk writes: > > > > If portupgrade can calculate the depency and launch many ports > > > build in same time for non-depending ports it's can be > > > wonderful. > > > > I'm sure it's a good idea. I'd use it too. But I have a very > > little free time with my current employment. So I can't implement > > it. Sorry. > > It is also my understanding that ruby (used to manage the > ports database) a) is not re-entrant and/or b) does not lock the > files it is using/changing. Having two instances running at once > causes Bad Things(tm) to happen. Presumably most of the work can be done in parallel with the critical stages serialised. There's already a build tool that builds several ports in parallel, I presume that's how it works. I can't remember what it's called offhand.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080703220009.4da5ff08>