Re: EAGAIN in read jobs pipe

2007-01-10 Thread james coleman
Oh dear. Sorry people. I was of course being a bit silly when talking about make -j 16385! Howard Chu wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps... On the other hand, if you're using -j 65K, why not just -j? Does you build even have 65K jobs? of course I do not use -j65k ! :-O :-) Very

Re: EAGAIN in read jobs pipe

2007-01-10 Thread Paul Smith
On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 01:53 -0800, Howard Chu wrote: An essential design choice. This stuff relies on reads and writes of the job_fd being atomic and the writes never blocking. POSIX guarantees a 4K buffer for pipes. Perhaps the code should check the resource limit and complain if the -j

Re: EAGAIN in read jobs pipe

2007-01-10 Thread Howard Chu
james coleman wrote: not much! also a build making more calls to make can result in jfactor * number of make calls jobs Only if you're using a totally braindead implementation of make. The whole point of the jobserver pipe is to eliminate this fanout problem. So I might regularily

[bug #18755] exported var-define and var-define from command line should appear in $(shell ) env

2007-01-10 Thread Jun Chen
URL: http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?18755 Summary: exported var-define and var-define from command line should appear in $(shell ) env Project: make Submitted by: chjfth Submitted on: Thursday 01/11/07 at 10:23 Severity: