Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 13:50:13 -0700 From: Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Akinori MUSHA <knu@iDaemons.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: port policies Message-ID: <20010504135013.A72262@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20010504132631.A55677@xor.obsecurity.org>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Fri, May 04, 2001 at 01:26:31PM -0700 References: <200104300810.f3U8AGY60114@freefall.freebsd.org> <86elua4wf1.wl@archon.local.idaemons.org> <20010430023347.A70094@xor.obsecurity.org> <20010504123304.B66630@FreeBSD.org> <20010504132631.A55677@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Hmm..don't know of any ports which do this actually. It's likely to be > safer (than using high -O values) though, because the author > presumably tested the build actually works with that value, and -j is > more of a deterministic thing (except for race conditions in the > build) than -O is. These days, make -j (>1) may well be safer than gcc -O(>1), but it still causes headaches for people with slower hardware and less memory. Yes, the list of ports that do this is very small, but it's still fairly lame. I do like proposed idea of a tunable -j number for usage across the tree. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010504135013.A72262>