Hi,
Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
parallel building (make -j).
Not having this is a PITA for me, since I do rebuilds of the whole
Debian archive on clusters of machines, and my current total build time
is only dependant of the time taken to build the large
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 06:08:52PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> parallel building (make -j).
>
> Not having this is a PITA for me, since I do rebuilds of the whole
> Debian archive on clusters
On 07/03/07 at 19:32 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 06:08:52PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> > parallel building (make -j).
> >
> > Not having this is a PITA for me,
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 06:08:52PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> parallel building (make -j).
You can't set a generic value.
For example: A machine with 6 cpus but only 256MiB ram. Building glibc
with -j6 is no problem. Bui
On 08/03/07 at 11:50 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 06:08:52PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> > parallel building (make -j).
>
> You can't set a generic value.
>
> For example: A machine with 6 cpus
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> > parallel building (make -j).
> You can't set a generic value.
>
> For example: A machine with 6 cpus but only 256MiB ram. Building glibc
> with -j6 is no problem. Building gcj-
* Lucas Nussbaum:
> Such a machine looks a bit strange (6 CPUs vs 256 MB RAM). I think that
> usually, modern SMPs have "enough" memory to handle what all their CPUs
> can do.
I'm not sure. 512 MB per execution unit is not too uncommen and may
cause problems for C++ packages (or MLton).
--
To
On 14/03/07 at 20:54 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Lucas Nussbaum:
>
> > Such a machine looks a bit strange (6 CPUs vs 256 MB RAM). I think that
> > usually, modern SMPs have "enough" memory to handle what all their CPUs
> > can do.
>
> I'm not sure. 512 MB per execution unit is not too uncom
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 18:08:52 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Bug #209008 proposed to have a common interface to tell packages to do
> parallel building (make -j).
> For some reason, the discussion that happened back in 2003 isn't logged
> on the BTS, but can be read in [2]. Everyone seemed to agr
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:52:05AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Personally I'd favour DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS_PARALLEL.
Yes, I'll second that. It makes no sense at all to try to have the
package predict how much memory it will need for the build; this amount
of memory will be different depending on the
Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Personally I'd favour DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS_PARALLEL.
Ack. Automated guesses are always a possible source for problems, and in
this special case, the human behind the build process should know best
which number of parallel processes is useful [1]
Marc
Foot
11 matches
Mail list logo
