Brian Harring posted on Tue, 13 Apr 2010 23:10:16 -0700 as excerpted: > RESTRICT=parallel is basically a big lock that forces building to go > down to one specific build/merge job- it's not at all fine grained. That > said, I'm not convinced it's worth actually *trying* to be fine grained. > > Stuff that needs this 'lock', if you look at it from the purely academic > angle is broken. The pkgs in question should be buildable without > modifying the livefs. > > From the pragmatic angle, fixing some of those packages is a pretty huge > endeavour hence this lock existing. I see no reason to encourage the > usage of this lock by making it more fine grained, either.
What examples of the problem do we have, other than xorg-server due to eselect opengl? For just xorg-server, killing parallel seems like a rather frustrating and indeed broken solution (especially for folks who prefer to run freedomware and thus have only the X11/mesa opengl version on their system anyway, so forcing non-parallel is an exercise in uselessness). If it's the only one, at /least/ only forcing non-parallel if the eselect opengl actually changes the selected opengl would seem reasonable. But if there's other non-contrived examples around, getting a couple of them on the table should I think clarify our potential usage constraints somewhat. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
