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 C3CCE1387FD for ; Sun, 8 Jun 2014 15:29:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B9768E0907; Sun, 8 Jun 2014 15:29:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23D11E0905 for ; Sun, 8 Jun 2014 15:29:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from marga.jer-c2.orkz.net (D4B2706A.static.ziggozakelijk.nl [212.178.112.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jer) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF7F534004A for ; Sun, 8 Jun 2014 15:29:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 17:29:23 +0200 From: Jeroen Roovers To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] EAPI6 Features Message-ID: <20140608172923.1d5557d8@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 6614c109-f6b8-4d51-979f-7d7ee22e9bfa X-Archives-Hash: bee1ea35685179c9e1d9c39ce51067b6 On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 09:04:20 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > > c) EJOBS variable > > Bug #273101 [17], gentoo-dev discussion [18] > > - Discussion was in 2008. Is there (still) consensus? > The only thing that might be worth noting is that distcc users may > have an interest in distinguishing between gcc jobs and everything > else. I once messed with dictcc with very high job numbers and it > worked great when make hit a directory full of .c files, and not so > great when make/ant/whatever tried to run 50 instances of java in > parallel. Not just distcc! We already regularly see problems with a combination of (a) tons of RAM, (b) a dozen CPUs and (b) matching MAKEOPTS and (d) -pipe, where concurrent linker jobs surprisingly consume all of the RAM and one or more linker jobs segfault or get killed. Anyone's MAKEOPTS calculation should already include all of those factors. Regards, jer