Ryan Schmidt wrote:
The other problem with parallel builds is that they are not identical each time you run them. The build may succeed 3 times, then fail the 4th. I personally haven't had the time to try to build each of my ports several times with parallel build on to see if they repeatably build correctly.
If the port does not build correctly the dependencies in the Makefile are wrong. If it ever fails for someone and he/she files some ticket it can be disabled. Usually there is no need to test it multiple times or something like that.
Locally I use a patched version since this option was introduced which has "use_parallel_build yes" as default. And so far port failed only on one occasion due to parallel building which was the python frameworks.
And as a side note, I am still in favor of making parallel building opt-out and enable it for every port when buildmakejobs is set to a value greater 1. Of course the default value of buildmakejobs should still be 1 because this really depends on the machine it runs on.
[snip]
Maybe we should revisit this topic, though like you say, if we get binary packages, then we don't need build success/failure statistics from each user, but only from the build servers.
As I said before in other emails, we will not be able to provide packages for each and every variant combination (that would be 2^n for a port with n variants). So building custom ports on the end-user side will still happen even once we ship binary packages for default_variants.
Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
