From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <marko@seul.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06,
	DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=4.0.0
Received: from obelix.spectraweb.ch (obelix.plusnet.ch [194.158.230.8])
	by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 138ACABD50
	for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Sun,  9 Jun 2002 10:20:44 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from seul.org (adsl-p42-dialup-89.adslplus.ch [195.141.144.89])
	by obelix.spectraweb.ch (8.11.2/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id g59FKb003508
	for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 17:20:37 +0200
Message-ID: <3D03C5F3.2050600@seul.org>
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 17:17:39 -0400
From: Marko Mikulicic <marko@seul.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Distribuited build
References: <3D03BB1C.8010405@seul.org> <200206091638.57868.pauldv@cs.kun.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/>
X-Archives-Salt: 80290181-8a8b-41d6-8e5d-5f54880fb25f
X-Archives-Hash: 52b58ed54e718b2c7c6d07a89b2c05f0

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