From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ky57D-0002jl-RF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:41:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C9F1AE03FC; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:41:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F70E03FC for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:41:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6572DB4781 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:41:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.429 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.429 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.170, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rx-rCbtq-mOM for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:41:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B0E6528F for ; Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:41:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ky56u-0005Sj-37 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:41:20 +0000 Received: from ip68-230-99-190.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.99.190]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:41:20 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-99-190.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:41:20 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposed change to base.eclass: EAPI-2 support Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 13:41:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200811022308.49072.loki_val@gentoo.org> <200811032053.59249.loki_val@gentoo.org> <4911E54D.6090008@gentoo.org> <200811051945.32471.loki_val@gentoo.org> <4911FFF7.8030603@gentoo.org> <491247F3.1090309@digital-trauma.de> 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=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-99-190.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: cd8f3781-db83-4f02-b373-86c46e54b8c2 X-Archives-Hash: 0d1886cb0540c602840d9eb70fe61dcc Thomas R=C3=B6sner posted 491247F3.1090309@digital-trauma.de, excerpted below, on Thu, 06 Nov 2008 02:27:15 +0100: > But with rotating storage, don't you (very much) only want one I/O-boun= d > job at a time? Invalid assumption(s). This is more a user list topic or personal wiki/ google research project, but there are at least four levels at which that= =20 is a likely invalid assumption on a well configured Gentoo Linux=20 installation on modern hardware, particularly one where the user is not=20 setting MAKEOPTS=3D1, thus indicating that he has and wants to use=20 sufficient resources for parallel jobs in the first place. If you like, mail me offlist and we can continue the discussion, as it=20 really is off topic for the gentoo-dev list. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman