Re: [gentoo-dev] EJOBS variable for EAPI 5?

Il 04/09/2012 19:15, Zac Medico ha scritto:
> On 09/04/2012 04:00 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:20:02PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote
>>
>>> This approach is fine imo, although I'd *potentially* look at adding a
>>> magic $PROC_COUNT var that is the # of cpu threads on the system;
>>> either that or defaulting jobs to it.
>>>
>>> I rather dislike requiring users to go jam a 2/4/8 in there when it's
>>> easy to compute.  That said, it's minor.
>>>
>>> Either way, yes, I think EJOBS should be in EAPI5.
>>    One question about the suggested EJOBS variable; will it over-ride
>> MAKEOPTS?  Every so often on the Gentoo-user list, someone comes along
>> with a mysterious build failure.  The first suggestion is to reset
>> MAKEOPTS to -j1.  And on some occasions, that is indeed the solution to
>> the mysterious build failure.
> That would be due to a missing dependency in the Makefiles, and using
> -j1 is just a workaround. The ebuild can be hardcoded to use emake -j1
> until the Makefile gets fixed.
>
>>    I set -j1 and leave it that way.  Yes, the builds take longer, but the
>> resulting binary is just as fast.  And the amount of time I "save" will
>> be blown away the first time I end up screwing around a couple of hours
>> trying to fix a mysterious build failure.  That's why I want the user to
>> have the option of over-riding EJOBS, should it ever be implemented.
> You could use EXTRA_EMAKE for that. You can do per-package settings via
> /etc/portage/package.env.

Dunno where to place this request, but if we go for something like EJOBS 
could we also make it phase specific?
So compile, install and test could have a different number of jobs running.
Possibly three different variables that override a predefined EJOBS.

TIA