On 2007-10-31 15:04:45 +0100, Markus Weissmann wrote: > On 31.10.2007, at 12:36, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > >> On 2007-10-31 12:26:44 +0100, Markus Weissmann wrote: >>> On 31.10.2007, at 05:13, Vincent Lefevre wrote: >>>> I disagree. Port maintainers should test their port to see if they >>>> work with "make -j". >>> >>> Well, you cannot reliably test this. If you're lucky it might work >>> one time and fail the other. >> >> So, what do you suggest? Remain with sequential builds forever? > > No, but we should only enable parallel builds for software we know to > behave correctly.
But you've said: "Well, you cannot reliably test this. If you're lucky it might work one time and fail the other.". So, under these conditions, you cannot know that they behave correctly. > I wont kick you if you enable a parallel build for a port that you > maintain and you are not 100% sure that it'll work _always_ -- the > bug reports are yours. But I do not like 1. unmaintained and 2. my > ports to automatically try to build in parallel I've never suggested that. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
