I had patches for this a couple of years ago when I worked on this
problem for summer of code. What I did back then is surely stale, but
if people really want it, I'd be happy to take another stab at it.
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Eitan Adler <li...@eitanadler.com> wrote:
>>Is this possible or am I being unreasonable, or both, or not?
>
> This is unsupported, but you are not being unreasonable. This is a
> much wanted feature.
>
>> Yes. Ports which support parallel builds will have MAKE_JOBS_SAFE=yes set
>> in the port Makefile. It defaults to running -j with
>> MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER=`${SYSCTL} -n kern.smp.cpus`, but you can change that to
>> some other # if you like.
>
> No, this is incorrect. The MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER and MAKE_JOBS_SAFE is used
> internally when building a single port. When the OP is asking if he
> can manually specify -j on the command line which would end up
> building multiple ports in parallel. This can not be done (primarily
> because there is no locking done on ports)
>
> Certain utilities can make this process faster. For example portmaster
> prefetches as much as it can,
>
>
> --
> Eitan Adler
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-po...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>
--
David
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
