On 13/09/2012, at 3:00 AM, macports-users-requ...@lists.macosforge.org wrote:
>>> I don't find a way to let port install multiple independent ports in >>> parallel to maximally use the cores on a machine. Is there a way to do >>> so? Thanks! >> >> This used to be allowed (unintentionally, I think) and would sometimes work, >> as long as the ports you were installing were truly independent of one >> another (including their complete dependency chains). But as soon as you >> started trying to do simultaneous port installs where parts of the >> dependency chains overlapped, and some of those overlapping dependencies >> were outdated or not installed yet, things did not work. Confusing error >> messages were printed that users often did not understand. >> >> We "fixed" the problem a few versions of MacPorts by introducing a lock >> mechanism that ensures that you can only install one port at a time. I miss >> the parallel install capability we used to have, but appreciate that this >> reduces the number of confusing problems our users could encounter, and thus >> decreases the number of problem reports we receive, which frees up our time >> to work on more interesting problems. > > There are many tools out there to handle dependencies for compiling > software and for many other purpose as well. For example, GNU make, > cmake, ant, maven, etc. I think that there should be (at least > theoretically) some way of harness some of these tools to handle > parallel builds of multiple ports even if they share dependency > chains. Whether it is easy to implement is another issue and I don't > know the answer. > > My inclination is that the feature that I request can be useful. As I > can port using binaries for only a very small fraction of ports. > Enabling parallel port can truly use all the cores to speed the > process. Recently, I just migrate from Snow Leopard to Mountain Loin, > It took almost 8 hours for me to completely install what had been > previously installed. There should be something done to improve this > process. Since you don't believe, why not enable 'Activity Monitor'. For me a build holds all 4 cores at the red line for a lot of time. Given this the effort to enable multiple builds will clearly not be worth the effort. Likewise the occasional 8 hour stint (overnight ?) compared to the time to implement the 'feature' and debug/troubleshoot (as explained) is time wasted that I would much prefer to be spent on real problems. James _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
