Re: portinstall breaks with -m -j 4
On Saturday 22 July 2006 22:13, Mark Linimon wrote: BTW, I apologize for this is not at all a portupgrade issue, but an issue of the ports system. It is an issue with individual ports -- actually not the port (e.g. Makefile framework, pkg-*) but the individual applications (IIUC). Well, at least the ports system itself should not be broken able to work with this. With larger ports I manage to reduce build times by 40% with distcc and a second machine. As far as I see it the number of ports breaking is rather low. Please feel free to suggest a framework (complete with regression test framework) where the infrastructure code can learn which ports are safe. I think it's going to be a harder problem than you think it is. Note that appears to work and can be shown to work under arbitrary build circumstances for all users are IMHO going to be two very different classes of problem -- and the latter will need to be solved before it can be used on the package-building cluster. It seem to me that virutally all the advantage could be obtained by passing -j just to the build stage, where portupgrade spend most of its time. In any case install is probably too IO-bound to benefit. The user could set say WITH_PARALLEL=4. The value could be passed down to the build if the port sets USE_PARALLEL=yes or the user sets WITH_PARALLEL_FORCE=yes. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
portinstall breaks with -m -j 4
When a port installs dependencies prior to building and the -j flag is set for make, portupgrade somehow breaks installing dependencies. If I simply do # cd /usr/ports/category/port # make install -j 4 it works fine, but the command # portinstall category/port -m '-j 4' does not work if dependencies have to be installed. I have tried to get some insight in this and it seems that the ports depended on simply head to the do-install target, omitting things like do-extract, do-patch and do-build. The cause is a mystery to me, though. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: portinstall breaks with -m -j 4
[LoN]Kamikaze wrote: When a port installs dependencies prior to building and the -j flag is set for make, portupgrade somehow breaks installing dependencies. If I simply do # cd /usr/ports/category/port # make install -j 4 it works fine, but the command # portinstall category/port -m '-j 4' does not work if dependencies have to be installed. I have tried to get some insight in this and it seems that the ports depended on simply head to the do-install target, omitting things like do-extract, do-patch and do-build. The cause is a mystery to me, though. -j is not supported for ports. -- Dixi. Sem. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: portinstall breaks with -m -j 4
Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: On Sat, 22 Jul 2006, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: L -j is not supported for ports. L L L Well, it should be, with all the multi-core CPUs coming. And all other L targets work fine with -j. It's solely the install target that's broken. L L Is there any reason why it is not supported? Too many software authors do not design their build invironment for parallel work. Many ports broke in configure and/or build phases just with make -j2. Sincerely, D.Marck [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN] Well, at least the ports system itself should not be broken able to work with this. With larger ports I manage to reduce build times by 40% with distcc and a second machine. As far as I see it the number of ports breaking is rather low. On many ports it simply doesn't have an effect, but so far only editors/vim really breaks on my systems. BTW, I apologize for this is not at all a portupgrade issue, but an issue of the ports system. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: portinstall breaks with -m -j 4
BTW, I apologize for this is not at all a portupgrade issue, but an issue of the ports system. It is an issue with individual ports -- actually not the port (e.g. Makefile framework, pkg-*) but the individual applications (IIUC). Well, at least the ports system itself should not be broken able to work with this. With larger ports I manage to reduce build times by 40% with distcc and a second machine. As far as I see it the number of ports breaking is rather low. Please feel free to suggest a framework (complete with regression test framework) where the infrastructure code can learn which ports are safe. I think it's going to be a harder problem than you think it is. Note that appears to work and can be shown to work under arbitrary build circumstances for all users are IMHO going to be two very different classes of problem -- and the latter will need to be solved before it can be used on the package-building cluster. mcl ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
