Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Jul 11, 2005, at 7:32 AM, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:20 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: Let's see: we already have an emake script, but using it for "make install" is a no-go because it uses -jX from make.conf and that's not good. A solution can be to improve emake wrapper to check if "install" is in its commandline, in which case it can automatically add a -j1 to be safe. What is the problem with using -jX for `make install`? THink about what happens in most `make install` phases, files get put in their DESTROOT, and many times permissions are set etc. when its done in parallel the chances of the makefile trying to operate on non- existent targets is quite high, and things start to explode. Regards, Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:02:52 +0200 Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | > Anything using a standardish autotools install can potentially | > explode when parallelised. | | That wasn't very informative... Feel free to hire me to research and write a twenty page essay on the exact details of the numerous dependency bugs for install targets generated by automake. -- Ciaran McCreesh -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Anything using a standardish autotools install can potentially explode > when parallelised. That wasn't very informative... ./Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:32:06 +0200 Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:20 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: | > Let's see: we already have an emake script, but using it for "make | > install" is a no-go because it uses -jX from make.conf and that's | > not good. A solution can be to improve emake wrapper to check if | > "install" is in its commandline, in which case it can automatically | > add a -j1 to be safe. | | What is the problem with using -jX for `make install`? Anything using a standardish autotools install can potentially explode when parallelised. -- Ciaran McCreesh -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Monday 11 July 2005 14:32, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Why not check which phase you're in instead? That also can be done, true. -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpC1VHMPecuU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:20 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > Let's see: we already have an emake script, but using it for "make install" > is > a no-go because it uses -jX from make.conf and that's not good. > A solution can be to improve emake wrapper to check if "install" is in its > commandline, in which case it can automatically add a -j1 to be safe. What is the problem with using -jX for `make install`? Regards, Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:20:20 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Let's see: we already have an emake script, but using it for "make | install" is a no-go because it uses -jX from make.conf and that's not | good. A solution can be to improve emake wrapper to check if "install" | is in its commandline, in which case it can automatically add a -j1 | to be safe. Why not check which phase you're in instead? -- Ciaran McCreesh -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] make and wrappers
Following the discussion me and Azarah had about make commands, I've started thinking of a way to fix this without being too intrusive and I found a bit of a solution following Az's suggestion to use a wrapper script. Let's see: we already have an emake script, but using it for "make install" is a no-go because it uses -jX from make.conf and that's not good. A solution can be to improve emake wrapper to check if "install" is in its commandline, in which case it can automatically add a -j1 to be safe. The the ebuilds can just use emake install to do the work, and let the profile define the default MAKE variable (gmake or make, we'll see in the mean time). BDEPEND in this case should not list any kind of make. If somethign needs exactly GNU make, it will list gmake in BDEPEND (sys-libs/make), and will set MAKE="gmake" in the ebuild, so that emake will use it. The same when we'll have something needing bsdmake, we'll add a dev-util/bsdmake ebuild sometime in the future, and then just BDEPEND on || ( sys-apps/freebsd-ubin dev-util/bsdmake ) [or just bsdmake depending if the bsdmake ebuild will be used on g/fbsd, too]. Comments? -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM) pgpPTv3nPmONg.pgp Description: PGP signature
