On Sep 26, 2013, at 10:21 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> Another related and more general question is whether "make install" >> shouldn't always be run with -j1. >> Since the bottleneck is mainly I/O during installation, I would >> expect >> that the performance would not be significantly degraded. OTH, in >> some >> cases, packages which build OK with make -jN do not always install >> (see >> http://lists.cross-lfs.org/pipermail/clfs-dev-cross-lfs.org/2013-September/001720.html) >> >> . >> It would be easy to change that in command generation. >> >> What do the others think ?
Hello Pierre, I've been working with using -j 1 during make install and I think that make -j 1 is great when installing. It is an issue with only a few packages, but perl can be a problem as stated, but e2fsprogs can be another problem. In CLFS Multilib e2fsprogs is another problem when using make install and MAKEFLAGS. I have made it a habit to use a sed and change all make install commands (including those with make -C src or whatever) -j 1 install. I have not had jhalfs die from that edit. Although, how would jhalfs implement that? If the install command has a certain tag for install then it could insert make -j 1 for that process. I'm at the point that when MAKEFLAGS are used, I think the devs need to dishonor MAKEFLAGS during install. We will require lots of voodoo to get jhalfs to use make -j 1 during make install or make -C src instlal or etc. Sincerely, William Harrington -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discuss FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
