* [gentoo-dev] MAKEOPTS settings
@ 2007-09-27 16:33 Christian Faulhammer
2007-09-27 16:59 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christian Faulhammer @ 2007-09-27 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]
Hi,
could there be side effects setting MAKEOPTS in the ebuild (in global
scope)?
V-Li
--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode
<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] MAKEOPTS settings
2007-09-27 16:33 [gentoo-dev] MAKEOPTS settings Christian Faulhammer
@ 2007-09-27 16:59 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-09-27 17:08 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2007-09-27 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 439 bytes --]
On Thursday 27 September 2007, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> could there be side effects setting MAKEOPTS in the ebuild (in global
> scope)?
you should only be incrementing, never setting ... anything that sets it is
broken while anything that increments it is considered bad form, but
currently overlooked due to a better solution lacking
iow, wrong:
MAKEOPTS="-j1"
currently overlooked:
MAKEOPTS="${MAKEOPTS} -j1"
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: MAKEOPTS settings
2007-09-27 16:59 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2007-09-27 17:08 ` Christian Faulhammer
2007-09-27 17:27 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christian Faulhammer @ 2007-09-27 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 743 bytes --]
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>:
> On Thursday 27 September 2007, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> > could there be side effects setting MAKEOPTS in the ebuild (in
> > global scope)?
> you should only be incrementing, never setting ... anything that sets
> it is broken while anything that increments it is considered bad
> form, but currently overlooked due to a better solution lacking
> iow, wrong:
> MAKEOPTS="-j1"
> currently overlooked:
> MAKEOPTS="${MAKEOPTS} -j1"
Ok, so the latter saves me from repeating all standard functions with
emake -j1. Thanks.
V-Li
--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode
<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: MAKEOPTS settings
2007-09-27 17:08 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer
@ 2007-09-27 17:27 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-09-27 17:49 ` Christian Faulhammer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2007-09-27 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1342 bytes --]
On Thursday 27 September 2007, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>:
> > On Thursday 27 September 2007, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> > > could there be side effects setting MAKEOPTS in the ebuild (in
> > > global scope)?
> >
> > you should only be incrementing, never setting ... anything that sets
> > it is broken while anything that increments it is considered bad
> > form, but currently overlooked due to a better solution lacking
> > iow, wrong:
> > MAKEOPTS="-j1"
> > currently overlooked:
> > MAKEOPTS="${MAKEOPTS} -j1"
>
> Ok, so the latter saves me from repeating all standard functions with
> emake -j1. Thanks.
sorry, i'll be a bit more specific ... the reason appending MAKEOPTS has been
sliding is due to the large volume of gnome ebuilds and integrated
eclasses ... it isnt trivial to pass that information along since the emake
happens in nested eclasses, so MAKEOPTS gets incremented in the ebuild
if you're doing it to avoid -j1 in like two calls to emake, that's poor
taste :p
also, any package that fails -j1 building should have an open bug about it ...
parallel building isnt something to be workedaround with -j1 and then ignored
as it can severely screw people (consider systems that have a crap ton of
slow procs -- common for mips people)
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: MAKEOPTS settings
2007-09-27 17:27 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2007-09-27 17:49 ` Christian Faulhammer
2007-09-27 18:19 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christian Faulhammer @ 2007-09-27 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1252 bytes --]
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>:
> > Ok, so the latter saves me from repeating all standard functions
> > with emake -j1. Thanks.
> sorry, i'll be a bit more specific ... the reason appending MAKEOPTS
> has been sliding is due to the large volume of gnome ebuilds and
> integrated eclasses ... it isnt trivial to pass that information
> along since the emake happens in nested eclasses, so MAKEOPTS gets
> incremented in the ebuild
It is an ebuild based on gnome.eclass, so it hits your case. :)
> if you're doing it to avoid -j1 in like two calls to emake, that's
> poor taste :p
I did not want to repeat whole gnome.eclass definitions.
> also, any package that fails -j1 building should have an open bug
> about it ... parallel building isnt something to be workedaround with
> -j1 and then ignored as it can severely screw people (consider
> systems that have a crap ton of slow procs -- common for mips people)
That software is from 2005 and I can't help it as I was doing arch
maintenance, maintainers were not reacting => not my beer anymore.
V-Li
--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode
<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: MAKEOPTS settings
2007-09-27 17:49 ` Christian Faulhammer
@ 2007-09-27 18:19 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2007-09-27 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev; +Cc: Christian Faulhammer
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 625 bytes --]
On Thursday 27 September 2007, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>:
> > also, any package that fails -j1 building should have an open bug
> > about it ... parallel building isnt something to be workedaround with
> > -j1 and then ignored as it can severely screw people (consider
> > systems that have a crap ton of slow procs -- common for mips people)
>
> That software is from 2005 and I can't help it as I was doing arch
> maintenance, maintainers were not reacting => not my beer anymore.
i'm not telling you to fix it, i'm saying it needs to be tracked and not
ignored
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-09-27 18:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-09-27 16:33 [gentoo-dev] MAKEOPTS settings Christian Faulhammer
2007-09-27 16:59 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-09-27 17:08 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer
2007-09-27 17:27 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-09-27 17:49 ` Christian Faulhammer
2007-09-27 18:19 ` Mike Frysinger
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox