| 1 |
Hello, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Do you all use only a single machine to build ? |
| 4 |
Does anyone use distributed build tools, like distcc or |
| 5 |
other tricks. |
| 6 |
While building a sigle package can be "upgraded" to |
| 7 |
distcc simply using the parallel make features and |
| 8 |
redirecting the compiler, it should be useful if entire ebuilds |
| 9 |
could be done in parallel. |
| 10 |
For example, when a package has two dependents they could |
| 11 |
be built in parallel. This would be specially useful for |
| 12 |
this packages wich doesn't build correctly with -j>1. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I have a lot of unused ghz in my lan which could do lots of |
| 15 |
background jobs if they could be well distributed. |
| 16 |
I'm not thinking jet of a way to implement this (it should not |
| 17 |
be very difficult) but I'm interested to know what |
| 18 |
are the need, habits, testing methodology of the developers. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Marko |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
PS: for those who doesn't know distcc: http://ftp.samba.org/ftp/distcc/. |
| 24 |
It preprocess locally and compiles on remote hosts. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If you share the filesystem with the sources, and have the same |
| 27 |
set of libraries/headers on all machines then "makeitdisturbed" |
| 28 |
offer better performance. |
| 29 |
http://pcm4036.die.supsi.ch/projects/makeitdisturbed |
Archives