From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1O27Qf-0000yW-Fj for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:35:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BA30AE0980; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:35:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.152]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD3CE0949 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:35:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 22so140482fge.10 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.87.15.35 with SMTP id s35mr6199317fgi.12.1271270100391; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pomiot.lan (213-238-106-44.adsl.inetia.pl [213.238.106.44]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 1sm1226480fks.54.2010.04.14.11.34.59 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:34:59 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Spam Box Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:35:27 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple emerges in parallel (was: [RFC] RESTRICT=parallel for builds that can't be executed in parallel) Message-ID: <20100414203527.6d43ad60@pomiot.lan> In-Reply-To: <20100414181029.GC30025@hrair> References: <4BC52478.3020303@gentoo.org> <20100414074520.339dd0ed@pomiot.lan> <20100414061016.GA30025@hrair> <20100414162018.26e0524c@pomiot.lan> <20100414181029.GC30025@hrair> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/gtQY8+Adm5BP3cNILHP.izN"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 4c946a17-6b16-4f41-a400-e2f8d2ec87fd X-Archives-Hash: 5a94f34df73bba147aeb4589acad1c98 --Sig_/gtQY8+Adm5BP3cNILHP.izN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:10:29 -0700 Brian Harring wrote: > Running multiple emerge's in parallel is unsafe due to the fact=20 > they've got two potentially very different plans as to what is being=20 > done, and that there is no possibility to ensure that pkg D that PM-2=20 > is building isn't affected by PM-1 building something (upgrading a=20 > dependency of pkg D for example). >=20 > Yes you can get away with it occasionally, that doesn't mean it's=20 > safe however. I agree with you -- such operations should be performed with appropriate caution, on user's own responsibility. But this doesn't mean we should prevent user from being able to do that. > Aborting merges is a very, very bad idea. Consider a pkg that has=20 > dlopen'd plugins, and just went through an ABI change for that=20 > interface. If you interupt that merge it's entirely possible you'll=20 > get just the lib merged (meaning a segfault on loadup of the > plugins), or vice versa (old lib is still in place, but new plugins > are there). >=20 > Don't abort merges- that really should be effectively an atomic OP,=20 > not interuptible. Sorry, by 'aborting merges' I meant rather aborting the build process before the 'merge' phase -- or even aborting it before it is started (i.e. before it unpacks a load of files into ${PORTAGE_TMPDIR} without sufficient space). --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/gtQY8+Adm5BP3cNILHP.izN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkvGCvUACgkQnGSe5QXeB7vt9ACgsvVjkyO1r7F+gfG4fUO3hdHG r9MAoLg5+ulcBrHM4OTMXMq7HRj4TmNc =/lHn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/gtQY8+Adm5BP3cNILHP.izN--