Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 07:12:21 +0200 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Benjamin Lutz <mail@maxlor.com>, ports@freebsd.org, Robert Noland <rnoland@2hip.net>, pav@freebsd.org Subject: Re: parallel builds revisited Message-ID: <462062B5.5050007@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <20070414000031.GA90090@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200704100452.40574.mail@maxlor.com> <1176391950.1820.3.camel@rnoland-ibm.acs.internap.com> <461E5F39.1030603@gmx.de> <200704122056.51123.mail@maxlor.com> <461E8919.1080702@gmx.de> <20070414000031.GA90090@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 09:31:37PM +0200, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: > >>> 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. > > It certainly is the case. If a makefile has incorrectly specified > dependencies then it may build by accident for certain values of n. > There are also lots of ports with race conditions which means they may > sometimes build but not always. I am aware of the theoretical existence of such problems, but has that ever actually happened? In my experience the port fails whenever something is wrong. I've never had a case where a port that didn't work because of 'make -j' worked when I tried again or with a different number of jobs.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?462062B5.5050007>