On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 05:15 AM, Chris Leishman wrote:
If developers really think that parallel compiling would be useful for
them, then there should be an option in fink to control it's usage.
I agree, and that was my original suggestion... when I brought it up on
IRC, it got nixed
Okay, my $0.02 as a user:
The model for this exists somewhat already--fink.config. Just as I add
the unstable trees, why can I not select ALL my global fink install
options in that file or even turn them on or off temporarily for a
particular install such as Qt or Kde3 if I know I am going away
I am behin Chrish Leishman on this, I must say (and I voiced this in the past).
Cheers,
Max
--
---
Max Horn
Software Developer
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
Long time listener, infrequent poster...
Chris Leishman wrote:
However, this is all working on the assumption that totally saturating
the CPU is desired behavior. This is true on dedicated build machines,
but I would strongly suggest that it's NOT the case for the majority of
fink use
> "Chris" == Chris Leishman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chris> I've noticed that a number of packages include -j2 or -j4 when running
Chris> make.
Besides being nearly useless on single-processor systems, this can
*break* some makefiles in untestable and unrepeatedable ways.
I recall when we
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 05:52 AM, Jeremy Erwin wrote:
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 09:36 PM, Chris Leishman wrote:
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 03:55 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
According to Jim Magee (i believe) on the apple list, in his
experience -j2 (I think he actually sugges
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 09:36 PM, Chris Leishman wrote:
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 03:55 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
According to Jim Magee (i believe) on the apple list, in his
experience -j2 (I think he actually suggested -j3) helps even on
single processor systems.
I'd be inte
Hi Chris,
For those packages on the list you made, do they use multiple jobs
within their own Makefiles too, or was this just added in the fink
builds?
I agree that make shouldn't be using multiple jobs by default, it
should be up to the end-user how many jobs they want. So I'm in
agreement w
On Saturday, December 7, 2002, at 03:55 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
According to Jim Magee (i believe) on the apple list, in his
experience -j2 (I think he actually suggested -j3) helps even on
single processor systems.
I'd be interested in seeing the reasoning there - because it's
certainly not w
hmm funny when I asked for a dual Ti ppl look at me funny :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Every power mac sold (for the past 6 months) is dual processor. Its an
>all-dual lineup.
-=[JFH] Justin F. Hallett
-=[JFH] Rendek Communications Inc.
-=[JFH] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 04:51 PM, Chris Leishman wrote:
AFAIK, there is absolutely no point in using -j2 except on systems
that have more than one processor, which is not that many in the MacOS
X world. Almost all make tasks should be cpu or disk io intensive, so
having more tasks r
Hi all,
I've noticed that a number of packages include -j2 or -j4 when running
make.
AFAIK, there is absolutely no point in using -j2 except on systems that
have more than one processor, which is not that many in the MacOS X
world. Almost all make tasks should be cpu or disk io intensive, so
12 matches
Mail list logo
