public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marko Mikulicic <marko@seul.org>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Distribuited build
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 17:17:39 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D03C5F3.2050600@seul.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200206091638.57868.pauldv@cs.kun.nl

Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Sunday 09 June 2002 22:31, Marko Mikulicic wrote
>
> 
> While I didn't test it yet, openmosix could be a solution for better 
> utilization of your computing power. Parallel dependencies are sometimes 
> difficult (cross dependencies), also it would require tweaks to emerge
> 

Well, I delibertely left out openmosix because it is automatically 
supported with make -j n. However there is a big issue with it:
  Openmosix process migration can distribute the load of a single system
through a cluster but if you install n packages they are build in 
sequence so that only compiles from a single build get eventually
distributed. And it's even worst when some packages have parallel build 
disabled.
  Moreover openmosix is not applicable in a etherogeneous network, whith
freebsd, linux, win32, tru64, linux-alpha machines, while distcc can
execute cross-compilers on every architecture (windows too).
  and openmosix requires all to run a special kernel, administrative 
issues,.... I think that something lighter is needed, for it to be
really useful. I have access to a LAN with 16 PIV 1.5Gh but with any 
kindof linux distros, versions, libraries, users. The only 
administrative power I have is to run niced jobs and a good amount of
ram.

  However the problem is not openmosix vs. distcc, while both are 
completely transparent with portage and both have the same problem:
  sequential builds.

As for cross dependencies, how does portage handle the now? There could
a queue for each pending build where dependent build are added.
RDEPEND does not conflict with paralell builds.
  I agree this would require tweaks to emerge. I think it's not
urgent in portage1, but it could go in portage2, which with it's added
performance could resolve this kind of dependence in acceptable time.
  What do you think ?

Marko



  reply	other threads:[~2002-06-09 15:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-06-09 20:31 [gentoo-dev] Distribuited build Marko Mikulicic
2002-06-09 14:38 ` Paul de Vrieze
2002-06-09 21:17   ` Marko Mikulicic [this message]
2002-06-09 21:49     ` Nick Jones

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3D03C5F3.2050600@seul.org \
    --to=marko@seul.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox