> > > The second probably would not be accepted...
> > 
> > I urge you to reconsider. Parallelization increases the speed of
> > this
> 
> I don't think anyone is suggesting that packaging multiple things in
> parallel isn't useful. I already suggested that nothing needs to be
> implemented in bacman proper in order for you to parallelize the
> work.
> You can write your own "pbacman" as simply as:
> 
>   for arg; do bacman "$arg" & done; wait

There is a huge difference between flooding your system with ~1000 jobs
and tightly controlling the maximum number. Adjusting the precise
number of jobs enables you to organize your resources which itself is
desirable.
Even if there would be a perfect wrapper for bacman - which there is
none - it would still make sense to implement easily understandable
options into bacman for everyone to use simply to spare others the time
of coming up with one.

Best Regards,
Gordian Edenhofer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to