) The two.make.log has the expected. The same commands executed from the
bash script do not behave as expected. I'm having trouble obtaining the
desired results with the bash script.
Regards,
Mischa Baars.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:27 PM Paul Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-03-11 at 18:14 +0100, Mis
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:14 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 06:51:54PM +0100, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > SECONDS=5; for (( i=0;i<32;i++ )); do { exit ${i}; } & pid[${i}]=${!};
> done; sleep ${SECONDS}; for (( i=0;i<32;i++ )); do wait -n ${pid[${i}]};
> e
on, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:46 PM Mischa Baars
wrote:
> You mean:
>
> for (( i=0; i<32; i++ )); do exit $i & wait -n; echo $?; done;
>
> with one command and one wait in a single loop. And this does execute on
> the command line. How interesting!
>
> for (( i=0; i<32; i
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, 20:20 Chet Ramey, wrote:
> On 3/11/24 2:50 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > Which sort of brings us back to the original question I suppose. Who does
> > that line of code function from a script and why does it fail from the
> > command line?
>
> Job
e logic between my code
>>
>> 1 threads_max
>> 2 loop
>> 3 inside loop , do if run is > than threads_max then wait -n one
>> then 4 spawn thread
>>
>
> 3 if run isnt more than max , simply ignore and spawn thread in next cmd
>
> i dont get ur points
&
t hand.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 8:49 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/11/24 2:46 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > You mean:
>
> > for (( i=0; i<32; i++ )); do exit $i; done; for (( i=0; i<32; i++ )); do
> > wait -n; echo $?; done;
> >
> > Because this doesn't an
Which sort of brings us back to the original question I suppose. Who does
that line of code function from a script and why does it fail from the
command line? My guess was that the same thing makes this line fail from
the Makefile.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:46 PM Mischa Baars
wrote:
> You m
e
>
How nice!
wait -n exit 1 & echo $?
You got me the solution :) Except that wait expects a pid after -n.
Maybe
for (( i=0; i<32; i++ )); do exit 1 & wait -n $!; echo $?; done;
is what you meant? The equivalence of sequential execution?
First think, then do magic.
>
>
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, 20:36 Greg Wooledge, wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 20:13 Mischa Baars
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Also I don't think that gives you an exit status for each 'exit $i'
> > > started. I need that exit status.
>
> "wait -n" withou
Hi Greg,
Good point. One for you :)
Cheerz,
Mischa.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:14 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 06:51:54PM +0100, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > SECONDS=5; for (( i=0;i<32;i++ )); do { exit ${i}; } & pid[${i}]=${!};
> done; sleep ${SECONDS}
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, 21:08 Kerin Millar, wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:36:48 -0400
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 20:13 Mischa Baars >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Also I don't think that gives you an exit status for each
one;
Because this doesn't and to be honest, I needed the pid and its index to
retrieve gcc's output from a log file array afterwards.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:25 PM alex xmb sw ratchev
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 19:22 Mischa Baars
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:2
;32;i++ )); do exit ${i} & done;
sleep ${seconds}; for (( i=0;i<32;i++ )); do wait -p pid; e=${?}; echo
"$(printf %3u ${i}) pid ${pid} exit ${e}"; done;'
disables / enables the notifications respectively, but doesn't do anything
otherwise.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 8:20 PM Chet Ramey wr
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 10:26 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/11/24 3:44 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, 20:20 Chet Ramey, > <mailto:chet.ra...@case.edu>> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/11/24 2:50 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > > Which sort of
able expansion. Therefore writing VAR=" \"string 1\" \"string 2\" "
> absolutely cannot do what you might expect; the embedded quote marks will
> be used literally, and then (because ${CFLAGS[0]} is not quoted) the
> resulting string will be split on any embedded w
-c 'seconds=1; for (( i=0;i<32;i++ )); do exit ${i} & done;
sleep ${seconds}; for (( i=0;i<32;i++ )); do wait -np pid; e=${?}; echo
"$(printf %3u ${i}) pid ${pid} exit ${e}"; done;'
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 8:20 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/11/24 2:50 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
&
edded whitespace..
>
>
So.. how do I make the script produce the same output as the Makefile?
Using 'printf <%s>' as Chet said I should, does show the difference between
the two, but it doesn't fix the problem.
>
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 at 18:56, Mischa Baars
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
to do the job right.
Best regards,
Mischa.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 8:20 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/11/24 2:50 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > Which sort of brings us back to the original question I suppose. Who does
> > that line of code function from a script and why does it fail
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 12:49 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 09:42:22AM +0100, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > Here's the script and the Makefile using "printf '<%s>'":
>
> Sadly, your mail user agent chose to attach "Makefile" with content-
:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 08:26 Mischa Baars
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 10:00 PM Paul Smith wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 2024-03-12 at 13:37 +0100, Mischa Baars wrote:
>> > > > I'd still like to hear why you aren't simply using "make -j"
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 4:14 AM Martin D Kealey
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 8:20 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
>> > On 3/11/24 2:50 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
>> > > Which sort of brings us back to the original question I suppose. Who
>> does
>> > > tha
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 10:00 PM Paul Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-03-12 at 13:37 +0100, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > > I'd still like to hear why you aren't simply using "make -j".
> >
> > That's because I don't want to define static compile and link targets
:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2024, Mischa Baars wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:52:16
> > From: Mischa Baars
> > To: alex xmb sw ratchev
> > Cc: psm...@gnu.org, bug-bash , help-make@gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: multi-threaded compiling
> >
> > I found another
No? No further suggestions?
Then I'd like to thank you all for your help and your input.
I'll be off-list now.
Kind regards,
Mischa Baars.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 9:17 AM Mischa Baars
wrote:
> Ok. Then this is what I was able to make of it. To be honest, I prefer the
> Makefile synta
:
#1
#all: one two
#2
#BIN=one two
#all: $(BIN)
#3
#all:
# SRC=(*.c); BIN=$${SRC[*]%.c}; echo $${BIN};
#4
SRC=(*.c)
BIN=$${SRC[*]%.c}
all: $(BIN)
> -Martin
>
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 at 18:17, Mischa Baars
> wrote:
>
>> No? No further suggestions?
>>
>> Then I'd
explain to me
what I'm doing wrong?
Hope to hear from you soon.
Best regards,
Mischa Baars.
2024031100 - gnu questions.tar.xz
Description: application/xz
of the mail. In the
attachment there are two directories, one and two, belonging to 1) and 2)
respectively.
I'm not into Vulcan mindmelds, so I hope everything from the first mail
makes sense to you and everyone on this mailing list now.
Best regards,
Mischa Baars.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 5:01 PM Paul
27 matches
Mail list logo
