| 1 |
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:10:29 -0700 |
| 2 |
Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Running multiple emerge's in parallel is unsafe due to the fact |
| 5 |
> they've got two potentially very different plans as to what is being |
| 6 |
> done, and that there is no possibility to ensure that pkg D that PM-2 |
| 7 |
> is building isn't affected by PM-1 building something (upgrading a |
| 8 |
> dependency of pkg D for example). |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Yes you can get away with it occasionally, that doesn't mean it's |
| 11 |
> safe however. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I agree with you -- such operations should be performed with |
| 14 |
appropriate caution, on user's own responsibility. But this doesn't |
| 15 |
mean we should prevent user from being able to do that. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Aborting merges is a very, very bad idea. Consider a pkg that has |
| 18 |
> dlopen'd plugins, and just went through an ABI change for that |
| 19 |
> interface. If you interupt that merge it's entirely possible you'll |
| 20 |
> get just the lib merged (meaning a segfault on loadup of the |
| 21 |
> plugins), or vice versa (old lib is still in place, but new plugins |
| 22 |
> are there). |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Don't abort merges- that really should be effectively an atomic OP, |
| 25 |
> not interuptible. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Sorry, by 'aborting merges' I meant rather aborting the build process |
| 28 |
before the 'merge' phase -- or even aborting it before it is started |
| 29 |
(i.e. before it unpacks a load of files into ${PORTAGE_TMPDIR} |
| 30 |
without sufficient space). |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Best regards, |
| 34 |
Michał Górny |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
<http://mgorny.alt.pl> |
| 37 |
<xmpp:mgorny@××××××.ru> |
Archives