From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 17 06:25:42 2006 Return-Path: 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 E5CAC16A400; Wed, 17 May 2006 06:25:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from edwin@mavetju.org) Received: from mail2out.barnet.com.au (mail2out.barnet.com.au [202.83.176.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B5B43D48; Wed, 17 May 2006 06:25:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from edwin@mavetju.org) Received: by mail2out.barnet.com.au (Postfix, from userid 27) id 671AA7073D3; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:25:41 +1000 (EST) X-Viruscan-Id: <446AC1E50001571F8F8A8E@BarNet> Received: from mail2-auth.barnet.com.au (mail2.barnet.com.au [202.83.176.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.barnet.com.au", Issuer "*.barnet.com.au" (not verified)) by mail2.barnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 286CC7073C7; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:25:41 +1000 (EST) Received: from k7.mavetju (unknown [10.251.1.18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail2-auth.barnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60E3B7073C6; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:25:40 +1000 (EST) Received: by k7.mavetju (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B327F2B3; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:25:36 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:25:36 +1000 From: Edwin Groothuis To: Vasil Dimov Message-ID: <20060517062536.GS1116@k7.mavetju> References: <200605171353.37745.paul.koch@statseeker.com> <20060517045403.GI1113@k7.mavetju> <200605171508.07228.paul.koch@statseeker.com> <20060517060026.GA40653@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <20060517061302.GR1116@k7.mavetju> <20060517062147.GA42089@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060517062147.GA42089@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Paul Koch 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 List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 06:25:43 -0000 On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 09:21:47AM +0300, Vasil Dimov wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 04:13:02PM +1000, Edwin Groothuis wrote: > > On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 09:00:26AM +0300, Vasil Dimov wrote: > > > Not really, locking will just prevent breakages. Let me illustrate my > > > thought with an example: > > > > > > port A depends on X > > > port B depends on X > > > > > > You start building A which results in building X via exclusive lock on X. > > > During the build of X you decide to build B which results in building X > > > (X is not yet installed) but you block trying to acquire the exclusive > > > lock on X so you wait _idling_ until building of X is done. Furthermore > > > what do you suggest to do when the lock is released? > > > > You have to obtain a lock on the X's Makefile before you are doing > > to check if you have this port installed. > > > > For example, a dependcy on pkg-config in the directory devel/pkgconfig: > > > > - obtain lock on devel/pkgconfig/Makefile > What do you do if that is already locked? Wait until you get the lock. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://weblog.barnet.com.au/edwin/