| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 31/08/12 11:27 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Fri, 2012-08-31 at 15:45 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 6 |
>> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:21:15 +0200 Ulrich Mueller |
| 7 |
>> <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
>>> Coming back to this old topic [1]. Is there still consensus |
| 9 |
>>> that we should have such an EJOBS variable? (It shouldn't be |
| 10 |
>>> called JOBS because this name is too generic, see the old |
| 11 |
>>> discussion.) Then we could add it to EAPI 5. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>>> Ulrich |
| 14 |
>>> |
| 15 |
>>> [1] |
| 16 |
>>> <http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_750e33f68b16d971dff1f40dd9145e56.xml> |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
If we're doing this, do we tell users to stop setting MAKEOPTS for |
| 21 |
>> EAPIs 5 and greater? Do we change the name of MAKEOPTS for EAPIs |
| 22 |
>> 5 and greater instead? Do we put fancy code in the package |
| 23 |
>> mangler to deal with it? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Users typically set MAKEOPTS systemwide in /etc/make.conf. If EJOBS |
| 26 |
> will have no effect for <EAPI5 ebuilds, then obviously we should |
| 27 |
> not be advising users to stop using MAKEOPTS until the whole tree |
| 28 |
> has migrated to EAPI5. And if EJOBS will be recognized by a future |
| 29 |
> version of portage for all EAPIs, then we still should allow |
| 30 |
> MAKEOPTS because some users may want to use --load-average. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Changing the name of MAKEOPTS in >=EAPI5 makes no sense. First, |
| 33 |
> because it's a standard environment variable used by gnu make. |
| 34 |
> Second, because having 3 different settings for parallel building |
| 35 |
> (EJOBS, MAKEOPTS, and "MAKEOPTS_EAPI5") would be insane. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Fancy code in the package manager would be the way to go IMHO. |
| 38 |
> Ulrich's message contains a reasonable description of the |
| 39 |
> algorithm. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> -Alexandre. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
I think, if i read the previous response to this correctly, that the |
| 44 |
suggestion isn't the removal of MAKEOPTS, but simply that the '-j' |
| 45 |
specification currently set in MAKEOPTS should instead be set in EJOBS |
| 46 |
in everyone's make.conf. This would then be appended to MAKEOPTS (for |
| 47 |
all EAPI) -and- be used for non-make build systems (for EAPI>=5) alike. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 50 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlBA4YUACgkQ2ugaI38ACPD96gD+Pu9f9SVG//0yhioO0LGP/W8o |
| 53 |
sIGpiMFIEddXvhUsDAwA/0EJkZF8jrN7zmt/LdZy3nlCGKTIkPNxp5ukUGDDWIJB |
| 54 |
=Dlem |
| 55 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives