On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote:


> 1. Until recently, BLFS has always used -j1 for timings.  For LO that
> recently changed in svn, and the change was matched with a comment
> about how many jobs were used.
>
> What is your problem with that ?  On your machine, the time for
> building binutils using make -j1 will differ from mine.  The SBU time
> is only a rough guide, and one _big_ packages (LO is probably the
> biggest), the difference will be magnified.
>

​Hi Ken,

There's probably a problem with the sequence of posts about LibreOffice.
that passed by your desk.

I'll summarize as best I can:

BLFS uses multi-core build (make -j ...) for LO which is an excellent idea
(IMHO).
However, I found the book line which tries to implement that

​--with-parallelism=$(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN)​
​​
​1.  UNnecesary:
LO uses 'make -j <with the same value as above>'  _by default_ (behind the
scenes).

I also added these two points:
2.  Confusing to some (a personal opinion, this time - as opposed to the
fact above)
3.  Ugly, especially in the context ( again, personal.  In the eye of the
beholder)

I also said that
​4.  For people (like Bruce and Simon) who would like to throttle down
their machines for heating​ reasons, they can simply _add_ a simple,
"clean" line:

--with-parallelism=<desired number of cores to put in play>

which _will_ be honored by LO.

Example:  you have 8 cores but
--with-parallelism=3                           # I allow only three cores
to work in parallel

2. You built LFS, but you are scared about dollar signs ?  Really ?
>

​That was my (terribly imperfect) style o​f British humor.  Apologies to
the multitude who don't find it
agreeable.  It was meant to reinforce my technical point that that kind of
line was superfluous.

Personally, I used to prefer back-ticks for subshells, but the
> effect is the same, is it not ?
>

​Based on what I said at point 1. above​,

​while ​interesting, the comment does not apply here.

3. And since I am now replying : what _was_ that post about whether
> it is ok to send attachments about ?


​I thought I might need to send some stuff in a cleaner manner (i.e., not
"detracting" from the main subject).  Even as a general inquiry.

As I hoped I made it clear in the post, I really didn't know how to do that
(and I still don't.)
In short, howto to this list vs in a "regular" E-mail to a personal
addressee.

Cheers,
-- Alex
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Reply via email to