| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 10:34:52AM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote: |
| 2 |
> From bind-9.3.2-r4.ebuild: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> # idea from dev-libs/cyrus-sasl |
| 5 |
> if has distcc ${FEATURES}; then |
| 6 |
> einfo "You have \"distcc\" enabled" |
| 7 |
> einfo "build with MAKEOPTS=\"-j1\"" |
| 8 |
> jobs="-j1" |
| 9 |
> else |
| 10 |
> einfo "build with MAKEOPTS=${MAKEOPTS}" |
| 11 |
> jobs="" |
| 12 |
> fi |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> emake ${jobs} || die "failed to compile bind" |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I think this is bogus. If building with distcc reveals a parallel |
| 17 |
> build issue, then the issue exists with or without distcc, it just |
| 18 |
> seems to happen less often without it. We've been down this road |
| 19 |
> before, maybe people have forgotten? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> bind-9.3.2-r4.ebuild failed to build for me on dual ia64. Building |
| 22 |
> with -j1 works. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Unless somebody can explain how this is valid, I'll go ahead and fix |
| 25 |
> the bind ebuilds (where "fix" means "use -j1 unconditionally since the |
| 26 |
> Makefiles aren't parallel safe"). |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Similar trickery in app-office/openoffice, although they enable -jN if |
| 29 |
distcc is enabled, else -j1 ... |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Always wondered how that was valid, just avoid OO compiles enough it |
| 32 |
wasn't something I ever got around to looking into :) |
| 33 |
~harring |
Archives