From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C009138010 for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2012 00:20:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1517DE0509; Sun, 2 Sep 2012 00:20:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1492DE04D2 for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2012 00:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pbbro2 with SMTP id ro2so6914067pbb.40 for ; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 17:19:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=tY8SVR2RKsU+5x0EfaaKnBFFS3cdO4ssd7wkRdYZS2U=; b=pvhIvXXNoZJJwsljtn+Wvg3S2xSY9TyUDoFqsYUKwYLZiXBA98BusVthUrdAkwuCRK Hs79HCDUC9yiU6v13+VeeyWo0pO8lHhjh9HYwXcYHApX3iDAPwJC1C7EwTl7LhTBzHgz 1VZ0IFzjDpxbVjO4mZb73VDKnshpTzPTKf/O7R/W12QqJBcQeQbrjolN8RxQuwcx1EO/ OS5AOnajX2eDIbHFrz+ZeYmmG0/M6MJ1/nN9rCt59sq2xntYqlCLpWwAb+uR1+/Wh+L0 c6yBn5+aaQgCHjhmKGdg7qg9qXN+hpKSvgb38toIcfsmHOSI+xRkpOcDZwaskZyd3Ext Fjpg== Received: by 10.68.241.228 with SMTP id wl4mr27167036pbc.51.1346545198377; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 17:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hc10sm6590891pbc.21.2012.09.01.17.19.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 01 Sep 2012 17:19:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 01 Sep 2012 17:20:02 -0700 Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 17:20:02 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EJOBS variable for EAPI 5? (was: [RFC] Create a JOBS variable to replace -jX in MAKEOPTS) Message-ID: <20120902002002.GB25302@localhost> References: <20544.29691.208130.35494@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120831154521.5258c549@googlemail.com> <20120831111244.0c17b8aa@gentoo.org> 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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120831111244.0c17b8aa@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 6bd588a9-3ff7-456e-869d-6c0a6e11ef22 X-Archives-Hash: 8fdccab29fa1491db9196807ff22d27a On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:12:44AM -0400, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 15:45:21 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:21:15 +0200 > > Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > Coming back to this old topic [1]. Is there still consensus that we > > > should have such an EJOBS variable? (It shouldn't be called JOBS > > > because this name is too generic, see the old discussion.) Then we > > > could add it to EAPI 5. > > > > > > Ulrich > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > If we're doing this, do we tell users to stop setting MAKEOPTS for > > EAPIs 5 and greater? > > How can this work ? I cant think of any simple solution. > > > Do we change the name of MAKEOPTS for EAPIs 5 and > > greater instead? Do we put fancy code in the package mangler to deal > > with it? > > IMHO EAPI-5 compliant PMs should do MAKEOPTS="$MAKEOPTS -j$EJOBS" for > every EAPI; using EJOBS from ebuilds/eclasses is allowed only in EAPI 5 > and greater. > This is retroactive but could be classified 'PM internals' so its fine > imho. This approach is fine imo, although I'd *potentially* look at adding a magic $PROC_COUNT var that is the # of cpu threads on the system; either that or defaulting jobs to it. I rather dislike requiring users to go jam a 2/4/8 in there when it's easy to compute. That said, it's minor. Either way, yes, I think EJOBS should be in EAPI5. ~harring