On 2007-10-31 15:04:45 +0100, Markus Weissmann wrote:
On 31.10.2007, at 12:36, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2007-10-31 12:26:44 +0100, Markus Weissmann wrote:
On 31.10.2007, at 05:13, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I disagree. Port maintainers should test their port to see if they work with "make -j".
Well, you cannot reliably test this. If you're lucky it might work one time and fail the other.
So, what do you suggest? Remain with sequential builds forever?
No, but we should only enable parallel builds for software we know to behave correctly.
But you've said: "Well, you cannot reliably test this. If you're lucky it might work one time and fail the other.". So, under these conditions, you cannot know that they behave correctly.
I wont kick you if you enable a parallel build for a port that you maintain and you are not 100% sure that it'll work _always_ -- the bug reports are yours. But I do not like 1. unmaintained and 2. my ports to automatically try to build in parallel
I've never suggested that. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.org> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)